Spainish m1916 MAuser 7.52 NATO vs 308 Win


PDA






mookiie
December 23, 2011, 01:55 PM
I just got a Spanish m1916 Mauser chambered in 7.62 NATO. I was wondering if anyone has shot commercial 308 Winchester ammo through one with no ill effects. I know the 308 win commercial ammo is a little higher pressure than standard 7.62x51mm NATO, but will it be a problem with this rifle? Has anyone shot 308 commercial ammop through their m1916? I got Remington Core-lokt 180 gn rounds just not sure if they would be safe to fire?

If you enjoyed reading about "Spainish m1916 MAuser 7.52 NATO vs 308 Win" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
R.W.Dale
December 23, 2011, 02:16 PM
7.62nato and 308 ARE THE SAME PRESSURE.

Aside from a slight headspace difference

However your rifle was intended to shoot neither of these. Instead it was planned to fire the dimensionally identical long obsolete lower pressure 7.62 cetme.

If it were me id only shoot reduced power handloads (think 307 win) Remington managed recoil ammo and even then I'd wear ansi approved eye protection religiously

posted via tapatalk using android.

mookiie
December 23, 2011, 02:24 PM
I do not believe you are correct. Please refer to the below except from surplus rifles:


"As with any military surplus, the rifle should be thoroughly safety checked. Double check caliber markings on weapons. Both 7x57 Mauser ammo and 7.62 NATO ammunition is available through numerous sources. Note that the 7.62 NATO cartridge is not the same as .308 Winchester commercial cartridge in terms of pressure ratings. Many shooters report using commercial .308 ammo with no ill effects, however REALLY, the weapons are marked for 7.62 ammo with max pressures of 49,700 psi CUP vs. 52,000 psi CUP. "
from:
http://207.36.233.89/1916guardiacivil/index.asp

I am fairly certain this rifle is not chambered in cetme.

R.W.Dale
December 23, 2011, 02:32 PM
NATO and 308 are the same. The difference is the military refers erroneously to cup as psi with no refrence to the actual difference betwixt the two pressure measuring systems.

The real question is does shooting a 60,000psi + cartridge in a small ring Mauser action from wwI make you feel warm and fuzzy inside?

posted via tapatalk using android.

USSR
December 23, 2011, 02:41 PM
R.W.Dale is correct. Two different methods of pressure measurement were done (SAAMI vs. Gov't), but the actual pressure is essentially the same.

Don

Jim Watson
December 23, 2011, 02:49 PM
I have read that the Spanish conversions came along after the 7.62 CETME was abandoned in favor of the standard 7.62 NATO. Therefore they were meant for use with standard ammunition. But not meant for MUCH use. They were for issue to border guards and line of support troops who would not do a lot of shooting but would free up the automatics for regular infantry.

I doubt a box of commercial JSP is going to blow up your conversion.
But Dale is right, any way you figure it, that is a heavier load than the rifle was built for.
A regular .308 (or 7.62N) is 10-12% over 7x57 chamber pressure, which is what most +P loads are.

I don't think the Army erroneously lists crusher pressures in psi.
The Defense Department is not a member of SAAMI and does not necessarily recognize the definitions of CUP and (piezo) psi. They just continue the old procedure of calibrating crusher pellets with dead load or hydraulics calibrated in pounds per square inch.
They don't care if it confuses the Internet Generation.

mookiie
December 23, 2011, 03:16 PM
so for reloads I am thinking of 40 gns of IMR 4064 and a 150 gn projectile. That should be within acceptable pressure correct?

lonniemike
December 23, 2011, 03:16 PM
Mookii, plenty of people shoot full power loads in their Spanishs. Plenty say don't.. The chances of a blow up are slim. But chances of headspace and lug set back issues could be in your future. In the 50's thru the 70's the Spanish used 7X57 and 7.62CETME.
Jim, your thoughts have much merit. It is like the 1889 Swiss rifle in 7.5X53 using as a last ditch effort the GP-11 ammo(7.5X55) for which it wasn't designed for. The original(? G-1) CETME assault rifles would not handle 308 or NATO loads and I think it was the G-3 that does shoot NATO okay. I'd find it hard to believe that the Spanish(in the 60's) converted to a NATO chambering before they entered in the NATO accords in 1982. FWIW, I think the original CETME round was close to the 7.62X39 in power/energy. AlltheBest

R.W.Dale
December 23, 2011, 03:20 PM
Commercial 308 loads I wouldn't be too concerned about in the 1916 would be the new managed recoil rounds from rem and fed.

Iirc surplusrifle.com had a write up on them awhile back

Again only wearing proper ppe as these old guns don't handle a case rupture or pierced primer very well

posted via tapatalk using android.

35 Whelen
December 23, 2011, 03:39 PM
How on earth did the shooting world start baseless rumors before the internet came along?

Reading this thread: 7.62 NATO Pressure vs. commercial 308 Winchester (http://www.surplusrifleforum.com/viewtopic.php?f=76&t=39614) should settle the ".308 vs. 7.62x51" arguement forever...at least in the minds of rationale people.

When I got my first computer back in the '90's and found shooting forums, I had lots of people tell me that if I shot factory ammo or full power ammo in my FR-8, I would eventually blow it up probably maiming or killing myself. This because it was chambered for the 7.62 CETME blah, blah, blah... Well, almost 20 years later and God only knows how many full power handloads, my rifle and I are still in one piece.

mookiie I have a 1916 like yours, except that I've modded it a bit:

http://i60.photobucket.com/albums/h6/308Scout/Scout%20Rifle%20Project/Finished.jpg

Mine, on the underside of the barrel near the muzzle is stamped "308 Win." So far I've fired nothing but near max hunting loads in it and just like with my FR-8, we're both still in one piece.

I have a buddy who's owned a 1916 .308 for 20+ years and I know all he's fired in it are commercial loads.

Until someone who has firsthand destroyed one of these rifles makes himself known, I'll continue to shoot mine as I always have. Enjoy your rifles and don't listen to the hand wringing worry worts who don't have any direct experience with these rifles.

35W

mookiie
December 23, 2011, 03:49 PM
I found an awsesome article on the exact question of this forum, apparently others asked the same questions as me so the importer samco had several rifle sent for test fireing with 55,000 psi 308 win loads and passed, they said they failed destructively at 98,000 psi. check it out it is a good read.

http://masterton.us/Gammohttp://masterton.us/Gammo


35 Whelen - thanks for the info, I was hoping someone who owned one could give me their personal experience - Thanks!
Thanks to everyone else who replied as well!

R.W.Dale
December 23, 2011, 03:55 PM
With regards to 35w folks drive their autos every day unbelted and don't get in an accident maiming or killing themselves too. That doesn't mean not wearing a seatbelt is just as safe it merely means THEY haven't had an accident.

Any way you care to argue it the fact remains that a 1916 is an OLD rifle and when chambered for 308 is firing a cartridges that exceeds any original chamberings pressure by several thousand psi.

posted via tapatalk using android.

lonniemike
December 23, 2011, 04:07 PM
35 Whelen, Like I said, "plenty shoot full loads". I don't own a Spanish but I do know people in both the light/heavy camps. I thought the 1916 model would be a FR7 rifle type and the FR8 is for 98 type Spanish actions. And I still find it hard to believe the spanish arsenal stamped/restamped 308win or 762NATO on rifles being scrapped/musterred out of service/exported in the 50's, 60's, 70's, 80's, or 90's. Would Century or someother arms dealer do it. You bet ya. AlltheBest

mookiie
December 23, 2011, 04:13 PM
R.W.Dale did you read the article I posted? 98,000 psi failure would be astronomically higher pressure than a commercial 308 load.

SlamFire1
December 23, 2011, 04:13 PM
Any way you care to argue it the fact remains that a 1916 is an OLD rifle and when chambered for 308 is firing a cartridges that exceeds any original chamberings pressure by several thousand psi.

So true. The basic problem is that these rifles were originally chambered in 7mm Mauser. The 308 operates at higher pressure.

Given the plain carbon steels these actions were made out, the period which they were made (think primitive process controls) and the lack of safety margin in the things, shooting these old rifles has risk.

I would not shoot loads that approximate modern 308 loads.


http://www.thehighroad.org/showpost.php?p=6707989&postcount=10

Originally Posted by Oceans
Thats funny Maj. Dad, I knew a correctional officer in the late '80s, who had one of them in what was supposed to be .308. This guy loved that rifle like it was a 1930s model 70. He talked about it constantly, shot it every time he went to the range and even bought an expensive case to haul it around in. I was always leery of a 1893 action chambered in .308. I was told that the Guardia Mauser was chambered for a very similar Spanish round, and not the NATO 7.62x51, and that this Spanish round was loaded to lower pressures. I do not know if this is true, maybe someone on the board does? I will say, that the rifle is handy, and nice looking.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.

R.W.Dale
December 23, 2011, 04:21 PM
R.W.Dale did you read the article I posted? 98,000 psi failure would be astronomically higher pressure than a commercial 308 load.

Which assumes that every example shares the same metallurgy and history of their catastrophic single point test example.

That doesn't mean that the combination of years of slight lug setback and a flawed case can't/won't combine to KILL YOU

posted via tapatalk using android.

SlamFire1
December 23, 2011, 04:27 PM
R.W.Dale did you read the article I posted? 98,000 psi failure would be astronomically higher pressure than a commercial 308 load.

Not really, about a 2:1 safety margin. I can recall safety factors for man rated systems being 8:1 for pressure vessels and hydraulic equipment.

mookiie
December 23, 2011, 04:29 PM
R.W.Dale - would you suggest i unload the 180 grn win 308 Remington ammo and reload with IMR 4064 and a 150 grain projectile? How many grains of powder would you suggest I start at?

R.W.Dale
December 23, 2011, 05:01 PM
R.W.Dale - would you suggest i unload the 180 grn win 308 Remington ammo and reload with IMR 4064 and a 150 grain projectile? How many grains of powder would you suggest I start at?

Just to be clear I'm not trying to be all fatalistic here. I've shot mausers older and weaker than yours. I just want you to understand these guns are OLD and don't enjoy the same uniformity of metallurgy we take for granted today. That if something goes awry it tends to be fast and ugly. IMO these guns can be safe and a joy to shoot, they're just not guns to take pressure risks with.

I personally wouldn't shoot factory ammo (excluding managed recoil) in a 308 small ring. If you handload there's a plethora of pressure tested reduced 308 load data from manuals that's right up your alley

posted via tapatalk using android.

35 Whelen
December 23, 2011, 05:05 PM
With regards to 35w folks drive their autos every day unbelted and don't get in an accident maiming or killing themselves too. That doesn't mean not wearing a seatbelt is just as safe it merely means THEY haven't had an accident.

Any way you care to argue it the fact remains that a 1916 is an OLD rifle and when chambered for 308 is firing a cartridges that exceeds any original chamberings pressure by several thousand psi.

posted via tapatalk using android.

I think you and many others think the rifles were made in 1916. That date is the MODEL number, not the year of production. And like I said, mines stamped "308 Win.".

If you have FIRST PERSON experience with the rifle in question being damaged by commercial loads, then I'll listen to you. Otherwise, what you state is nothing more than an uneducated opinion.


Quote:
Originally Posted by mookiie http://www.thehighroad.org/images/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?p=7819468#post7819468)
R.W.Dale did you read the article I posted? 98,000 psi failure would be astronomically higher pressure than a commercial 308 load.

Which assumes that every example shares the same metallurgy and history of their catastrophic single point test example.

That doesn't mean that the combination of years of slight lug setback and a flawed case can't/won't combine to KILL YOU



I find it amazing that when presented with hard facts such as the referenced article, some people STILL insist on believing their assumptions.


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.


A crappy, weak action and bad headspace are two entirely different matters.

As far as the age of the action is concerned, that's not a valid arguement. Take for example the Swedish Mauser. MAny were manufactured around the turn of the century, (I owned one that was made in 1902) yet these rifles were designed to fire high pressure rounds. If you don't believe me, check Norma's website and some of their loads.
Likewise the Mosin Nagant. Many of these were made pre-1900 yet they fire the 7.62x54r that's anything but a low pressure round.

Again, I'll eagerly listen to firsthand experience, but pay no attention to the stories of your uncles cousins buddies father-in-law who had problems with the rifle in question.

35W

R.W.Dale
December 23, 2011, 05:17 PM
A crappy elweak action and bad heafspace ARE NOT two diffrrnt things!

How exactly do you figure heafspace goes from good to bad? It does it from soft metal peening and flowing away from the bolt lugs point of contact slowly over time.

I gotta ask 35 do you even own a set of headspace gauges?

posted via tapatalk using android.

mookiie
December 23, 2011, 05:18 PM
yes my manuals list starting pressure loads at about 37,000 and 40,000 psi would this be a low enough pressure to use?

35 Whelen
December 23, 2011, 05:38 PM
A crappy elweak action and bad heafspace ARE NOT two diffrrnt things!

How exactly do you figure heafspace goes from good to bad? It does it from soft metal peening and flowing away from the bolt lugs point of contact slowly over time.

I gotta ask 35 do you even own a set of headspace gauges?

posted via tapatalk using android.
Of course they are. You're ASSUMING bad headspace occurs ONLY with bolt lug setback. It also occurs when some knucklehead did a poor job of barreling the rifle.

No I don't own a set of headspace gauges. Does this make me wrong and you right?

Again, tell us your experiences with the Spanish 1916. I'm still waiting....

35W

R.W.Dale
December 23, 2011, 06:23 PM
Of course they are. You're ASSUMING bad headspace occurs ONLY with bolt lug setback. It also occurs when some knucklehead did a poor job of barreling the rifle.

No I don't own a set of headspace gauges. Does this make me wrong and you right?

Again, tell us your experiences with the Spanish 1916. I'm still waiting....

35W

I said from good to bad. Not starting out badly. If you didn't check your rifles when aquired and don't know what the headspace is NOW then your experience is no more valid than mine. You simply have no clue as to what you've done or not done by shooting full powered ammo. All you can add is I've gotten away with it for THIS long.

I've owned several small ring Mausers from 1891's to a couple Swedes. Not once have I ever fired a cartridge that produced more pressure than originally intended. Because the fact of the matter remains Paul Mauser himself saw fit to incorporate several key safety improvements in his later designs as cartridge pressures increased from what his small ring design was proofed for. Do you know something about these actions Mr Mauser didn't?

posted via tapatalk using android.

NCsmitty
December 23, 2011, 07:58 PM
My thoughts are that if you feel confident putting your face near a pre-'98 small ring action designed for a 51,000PSI cartridge, and firing a 62,000PSI cartridge, you certainly have that right.
Throw in the fact of questionable metallurgy and heat treat stigma that Spanish Mausers carry, I would keep pressures to a reasonable level if I was foolish enough to own one.

I have a M38 6.5 Swedish Mauser that is rated for the same pressures as the 1916 Guardia FR-7, and that's the max it gets fed when I do shoot it.

Here's the link to the defunct surplusrifle site on the 1916 Guardia.

http://207.36.233.89/1916guardiacivil/index.asp

yes my manuals list starting pressure loads at about 37,000 and 40,000 psi would this be a low enough pressure to use?


If you stick with the start loads listed in the manuals, you will be better off than shooting full house 308 Win loads.


NCsmitty

ball3006
December 23, 2011, 08:10 PM
No difference except for the headstamp. I have a 95 Mauser conversion to 308 that was done in 1965. It handles anything I shoot. HOWEVER.......I reload for accuracy, not for max loads and max velocity. I don't shoot commercial ammo in this rifle as I have a 5 gal bucket of LC brass that I reload. The brass passes through a 308 resizing die with no problems. The chamber of this rifle is a minimum chamber too......chris3

Claymore1500
December 23, 2011, 08:35 PM
I own a 1916 spanish mauser, I too have read all of the different theories on pressure, most, if not all of them tend to leave me with more questions than answers.

The one piece of seemingly sound advice I have read, is that if you hand load, you can go by the specs for a .300 savage round and you should be safe.

I have checked mine several times and found no problems, I have used factory .308win. (although not an enormous amount), knowing that there is no guarantee that any rifle is bullet proof (no pun intended), I have sidelined mine until I can get a rifle press to download my ammo.

guyfromohio
December 23, 2011, 08:38 PM
I have one made by Steyr and shoot .308. No problems.

303tom
December 23, 2011, 08:44 PM
I shoot both in mine.........

Jim Watson
December 23, 2011, 08:52 PM
Reloading for the 1916 and FR7 '95 action .308/7.62:
Lyman shows a starting .308 load of 43 gr IMR 4064 and a 150 gr JSP at 2645 fps and 41,100 CUP. This is lower pressure than 7x57 maximum and comparable velocity to a 7mm or .300 Savage. This is where I would be shooting a conversion.

Managed recoil. Does Remington SAY that "managed recoil" means lower pressure?
It need not if they are using near maximum loads of fast burning powder. That would reduce ejecta mass, give more consistent subload velocity, and save money. But not reduce chamber pressure. Like shotshells. People thing that Cheapmart promotional loads with light shot loads equals low pressure for their old guns. But it doesn't. These things are really pretty hot with top powder loads to drive the light shot load hard enough to cycle automatic shotguns.

SlamFire1
December 23, 2011, 10:31 PM
As far as the age of the action is concerned, that's not a valid arguement. Take for example the Swedish Mauser. MAny were manufactured around the turn of the century, (I owned one that was made in 1902) yet these rifles were designed to fire high pressure rounds. If you don't believe me, check Norma's website and some of their loads.

But of course age is a valid argument, if you have not read up on the technology of the era, you don't have an appreciation how primitive manufacturing technology was back then.

This was state of the art after your 1902 action was built

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v479/SlamFire/FarmanLonghorn1910Aircraft.jpg

Swedish service rifle ammunition is not that hot.

M38 Infantry Carbine 24" barrel
28-Oct-94 T ≈ 60 °F

143 gr 1986 Swedish Ball OAL 3.065" 47.4 grs powder average

Ave Vel = 2427
Std Dev = 22
ES = 62
Low = 2395
High = 2457
N = 10

These older rifles don’t have a lot of “shooter protection” features in them. The M98 is the absolute best in this regard but here the poster has a small ring Mauser. Just like the Swedish Mausers. These small ring Mausers don’t vent gas well, and because they are made from plain carbon steels, when things go seriously wrong, they frag.

I don’t know anything about the circumstances of this picture other than what you see. But it speaks volumes.

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


If I were to shoot 308 in one of these rifles, I would try this load. A 168 with 39.0 grains IMR 4895/H4895/AA2495. It is very accurate out to 200 yards, I think I shot it at 300 yards once but I decided I wanted more velocity incase of a wind shift. It pushes a 168 around 2450 fps.


http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v479/SlamFire/Targets/M70Win200-14X168Nosler39.jpg

No difference except for the headstamp. I have a 95 Mauser conversion to 308 that was done in 1965. It handles anything I shoot. HOWEVER.......I reload for accuracy, not for max loads and max velocity. I don't shoot commercial ammo in this rifle as I have a 5 gal bucket of LC brass that I reload. The brass passes through a 308 resizing die with no problems. The chamber of this rifle is a minimum chamber too......chris3

A bud of mine told me of firing one round through a 7mm 1895 Mauser. He said the upper receiver ring took off for parts unknown.

mookiie
December 24, 2011, 12:15 PM
Any other input?

35 Whelen
December 24, 2011, 03:48 PM
Mookiie, I think the rest is up to you to decide. There's been some very compelling evidence that the rifles are good to go with modern ammo. I don't know how anyone could argue with the H. P. White Laboratory tests of the rifle(s), coupled with the fact that the importer/seller, whose very livelyhood is on the line, sells these rifles, even to this day, as .308 Winchesters.
But there will always be those who, no matter what evidence, facts and data they're presented, are going to see things their own way and form contrary opinions. That's OK, as they're entitled to their opinions.

I say enjoy your rifle and be prudent, watching for signs of headspace issues in the form of stretched brass and incipient head separation.

If over the next 20 years I find any problems with either of my military based .308's I'll certainly report it here.

Oh and one last thing, as someone else wisely mentioned, "Reduced Recoil" does NOT necessarily mean reduced pressure. As an ardent shooter of reduced loads in the form of cast bullets, I can tell you unhesitantly that the most accurate, consistent loads are assembled with light charges of fast burning powder, NOT by simply reducing the charges of "standard" rifle powders. As such, this type load, though yielding low velocity and recoil, can easily approach standard operating pressures. But don't trust me, consult the Lyman 49th edition manual as it's chock full of loads such as these.

35W

ball3006
December 24, 2011, 03:54 PM
I forgot to ask..........is your rifle a large or small ring Mauser? If it is a large ring, Noooooooooo problemmmmmmmmm......chris3

303tom
December 24, 2011, 04:19 PM
What are these ? http://www.midwayusa.com/product/830685/winchester-usa-ammunition-762x51mm-nato-147-grain-full-metal-jacket-box-of-20

R.W.Dale
December 24, 2011, 04:20 PM
I forgot to ask..........is your rifle a large or small ring Mauser? If it is a large ring, Noooooooooo problemmmmmmmmm......chris3

The op's rifle is a small ring Mauser.


I agree large ring is gtg.

I have a one of the "American eagle" Mauser rebuilds made on a large ring m43 Spanish action. After checking the headspace I have no qualms about shooting 308 or 7.62 through it all day long and do just that.

http://img.tapatalk.com/a6cd09fa-4254-31ac.jpg

posted via tapatalk using android.

MR
December 24, 2011, 04:32 PM
I have a 1912 Styer that was converted to 308/7.62 by re-barreling. I saw pics of 95 Chilean that had the 7x57 chamber reamed out and an insert soldered in, then re-bored, rifled and chambered to 7.62. That was a scarey sight, what happens when the solder melts? The pressure arguments are moot.

mongo4567
December 24, 2011, 05:12 PM
I've seen a lot of the small ring Mausers converted to .308/7.62x51. I'm not going to put my face next to one with a full power load. That said, I'm not going to be pushing the pressure max on anything I shoot. Just looking at the fit and finish of the Swedish mausers I would trust the metalurgy more that the Spanish ones. To me the Spanish Mausers look pretty rough.

The 1912 Steyr rifles that were converted are all 98/large rings and a whole different animal.

MR
December 24, 2011, 09:34 PM
Here is a pic of the conversion I mentioned in my above post. When i read about this conversion I pulled the barrel off one of the 1912 I had just to make sure of its conversion method. I have been looking for a 1916 7.62/308 to pull the barrel from to see if it was a re-barrel or a re-bore as shown in attached pic. I have heard of one issue with a 1916, but that was on the internet 2nd hand.

BrocLuno
December 24, 2011, 10:59 PM
So I'm guessing here, and we all know what that's worth - but if that chamber insert was made from modern nickel steel, it would actually add strength to the overall action. It is a bi-metal laminated structure at this point.

Solder won't melt until roughly 540*, so it's unlikely to ever get that hot in in a deer camp situation? In a prolonged fire fight, maybe. But I wouldn't want to be handling a bolt gun with a chamber area at 500* The mirage in the sights would mean you could not hit the next county :(

So, we generally don't like inserts as they can work loose, but that one seems to be reasonably well done. Would I shoot 50 rounds of commercial ammo in that one? Probably not. Would I tie it to a tree and test fire a load or two? You bet. And I'd look at the cases very carefully. If it looked OK, I might loan it out to someone I didn't like very much :evil:

Ignition Override
December 24, 2011, 11:33 PM
The information provided by 35 Whelen and RW Dale about the confusion between Spanish 7mm and the later, stronger 8mm Spanish Mausers duplicates what I learned last summer over several hours or searching.

Lots of people see or hear the word "Spanish Mauser", and based on their buddies' comments (or the 7.62 vs .308 dissertation at "Surplusrifle") after that, if they also hear the designations FR7 and FR8, it doesn't seem to register that they could be quite different.

One guy last summer posted a published chart which stated that converting from military CUP requires adding a factor of about 10,000, in order to equate to commercial psi.
Maybe some info I read is wrong, but more than a few people stated that NATO 7.62 is about 58,000 psi max., and max. commercial .308 is about 62,000 psi. max.

As for the strong actions of the Spanish 8mm Mauser, if they were built to a similar strength as the German or Czech 8mm Mauser action (note: some [other]Czechs were 7mm), then my FR8s are quite strong.
The commercial brass cases have been used over ten times using min. loads (41 gr. 4064), with no external/internal signs of deformity, and with the Field gauge, the matching bolts will Not turn, or turn just a tiny bit.
I never bought the nice FR8 in a Pensacola store last October because the bolt did not match, and did not then know that it could have been checked for lug contact.

35 Whelen
December 24, 2011, 11:40 PM
One guy last summer posted a published chart which stated that converting from military CUP requires adding a factor of about 10,000, in order to equate to commercial psi.
Maybe some info I read is wrong, but more than a few people stated that NATO 7.62 is about 58,000 psi max., and max. commercial .308 is about 62,000 psi. max.



That one guy would be wrong. There's no way to convert CUP to PSI or vice versa. Read the post by the Ballistic Engineer over at Surplus Rifle again. Very informative stuff.

35W

HGM22
December 25, 2011, 04:45 AM
I'm no Mauser expert, but from my understanding the large ring Mausers have vents in them should something go wrong, whereas the small ring Mausers do not. So, if something does indeed go wrong, its not as likely to simply be some gas in the face. I know this has been alluded to, but I just want to make it clear for those who have a small ring Mauser and don't know.

If I had to use one of these rifles I'd certainly check the headspace at intervals. Even then, no guarantee there won't be a catastrophic failure (it is old metallurgy after all).

FWIW I believe that rifle with the blood on it took its owner's life, but I could be mistaken; try googling it.

R.W.Dale
December 25, 2011, 07:58 AM
The guys over on sks boards mistakenly refer to this fr8 as an fr7 but none the less it shows that even the large ring Mauser can be destroyed.

I have no idea to the actual circumstances. I'm guessing a pistol powder handload or some of that funky ammo out of Pakistan

http://www.sksboards.com/smf/index.php?topic=32517.0

posted via tapatalk using android.

SlamFire1
December 25, 2011, 08:49 AM
According to what I have read on the web, a FR7 is built around the 1916 small ring mauser action. And this is a small ring mauser.

Would be very interesting to know what blew the case head. Fuzzy pictures but looks like the reminder of the case is in the chamber.

That proof house article, http://masterton.us/Gammo, it only tells you enough to make you want to buy one of these rifles.

We don't know the amount of yield, if if they measured yield in the White Lab tests, in the receivers under test. We don't know when these rifles started to develop headspace. All we read is that a 98 Kpsia blew the action. That is actually not a lot of load when you compare what modern steels can hold.

I really doubt that any of the Importers of these things are liable in the least from damages with these things. You hurt yourself, you go sue the Spanish government.

One of the philosophical issues with one shot tests is that you test one item and make an assumption that the rest of population is just like that one.

This is reasonable at the end of a production line, assuming your processes and procedures are under control. (Of course they are never under total control or you would not be performing lot testing!)

When you get into something like these old surplus rifles, they all have different histories, different stresses and strains in their lifetimes, different manufacturers, so taking the results of a one shot destructive test and applying it to the whole population is even more of a stretch.

Materials used in these old rifles were just awful. For those unfamiliar with the terms, the yeild point of steels is just when it starts to deform. Ultimate is when it breaks.

I made an assumption that the plain carbon steels the Spanish used in these Mausers is similiar to the plain carbon steels used by Springfield Armory.

I did a composition search and found AISI 1117-1118 steel, which is similar in composition to Springfield’s Armory Class C steel used in the 1903-1918 M1903 Springfields. I could not find something that was just carburized and quenched , which was the heat treatment, but I found data for 1 inch round AISI 1118 mock carburized, reheated to 1450 F, quenched, tempered. This is similar to the double heat treatment. The Ultimate strength is 103,000 psi, yield 59,300 psi, elongation at break 19%.

Around 1918 Springfield Armory started using a nickel steel, which was a cutting edge steel for the era. For something similar to WD2340 Nickel steel, I found one inch round AISI 4820. For that material, mock carburized, 1450 F reheat, water quench, the ultimate strength was 163,000 psi and the yield strength was 120,000 psi, elongation at break 15%.

Today’s receivers are usually made of 4140. For a 1 in round AISI 4140 Steel, normalized at 870°C (1600°F), reheated to 845°C (1550°F), oil quenched, 260°C (500°F) temper, ultimate strength 270,000 psi, yield 240,000 psi, elongation at break 11%

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v479/SlamFire/Blowups/pix517854079.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v479/SlamFire/Blowups/pix517853969.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v479/SlamFire/Blowups/pix517853500.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v479/SlamFire/Blowups/pix517854000.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v479/SlamFire/Blowups/pix517853454.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v479/SlamFire/Blowups/pix517854235.jpg

R.W.Dale
December 25, 2011, 09:09 AM
I was mistaken

posted via tapatalk using android.

SlamFire1
December 25, 2011, 09:17 AM
But that isn't an fr7 its an fr8 as evidenced by the flashhider gas tube arrangements and the rear sight.

Whatever the model number after the conversion, it is a small ring mauser, not a M98 action.

R.W.Dale
December 25, 2011, 09:19 AM
I think you may be right on closer inspection

mookiie
December 25, 2011, 11:00 AM
SlamFire1 - so i assume you mean to say that shooting commercial 308 win in this rifle would be a mistake, would you also say that a lower pressure handload in the rifle would also not be worth the risk to fire?

R.W.Dale
December 25, 2011, 11:13 AM
SlamFire1 - so i assume you mean to say that shooting commercial 308 win in this rifle would be a mistake, would you also say that a lower pressure handload in the rifle would also not be worth the risk to fire?

I know this isn't addressing me but id like to comment none the less.

Firing any OLD rifle assumes a certain degree of risk. But to do so with loads that exceeds the original design by 20% is just asking for troubles. A design that in a safety careless age was deemed to have needed safety improvement.

I would shoot the gun. But I would check headspace every few outings. I would wear safety glasses and I would keep loads to 40k psi or less.

In short it would make a good trail boss cast bullet gun for me.

posted via tapatalk using android.

SlamFire1
December 25, 2011, 12:55 PM
Firing any OLD rifle assumes a certain degree of risk. But to do so with loads that exceeds the original design by 20% is just asking for troubles. A design that in a safety careless age was deemed to have needed safety improvement.

I would shoot the gun. But I would check headspace every few outings. I would wear safety glasses and I would keep loads to 40k psi or less.

Agree, and we are trying to make you understand your risk. Check the headspace after firing till you have confidence that nothing is changing.

Which is what I did after rebarreling this drill rifle receiver. No change in headspace after two such outings. I think it is good to go.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v479/SlamFire/M1903/M1903A3DrillRifleReceiverDSCN8188.jpg

SlamFire1 - so i assume you mean to say that shooting commercial 308 win in this rifle would be a mistake, would you also say that a lower pressure handload in the rifle would also not be worth the risk to fire?
The load I recommended post #31 is a 35,500 psia load according to my Lyman 48th edition.

mookiie
December 25, 2011, 08:42 PM
Slamfire1 and RW Dale - Thanks for the input now I have a starting PSI pressure to use as a guide that is exactly the kind of information I really wanted. Thanks again guys!

R.W.Dale
December 27, 2011, 08:17 PM
Today on my way to my favorite deer hunting spot I stopped by one of the gun stores somewhat on the way.

Browsing along the milsurp section I saw an all original 1891 argie that looked pretty promising. Well after looking at it the tag on the Bubba 1891 next to it caught my eye. IT WAS CHAMBERED FOR 308 WIN!!!!

Holy head injuries Batman!

But after contemplating informing the obviously clueless staff in on the risk I noticed the original bbl was used complete with its .313 to .314" groove diameter. I doubt pressures or accuracy would be that high.

posted via tapatalk using android.

68caliberkiller
January 5, 2012, 12:06 AM
I've got a FR8, spanish mauser 7.62. Love it, short carbine, great woods gun. I bought a bunch of spanish cetme ammo, relatively cheap, around $12 a 15 round box, noncorrosive. I've killed several whitetail and even a few hogs with it no follow up shots required. I was concerned at first if I'd need more power, as they say its more about shot placement. K98 Mauser action is a very strong and proven action, and the 8mm mauser round it was designed around was basically the german 30-06. I know the .308w has higher pressure but I feel the recoil from a 30-06 in my shoulder. The cetme round however shoots like a plinker, poorman's reduced recoil round. You can shoot through a box or 2 and not even feel it.

desidog
January 5, 2012, 02:53 PM
That KB'd rifle posted by Slamfire1 in post #45 is DEFINITELY an FR-7...i know because it says so right on it. Look at the serial #.

As for the pressure issue, I've chimed in on this before in other threads; I've studied it hard since i had an FR-7 and now an FR-8. But i'll just say, Why risk it?

Get an MCAce .308 to 7.62x25 conversion, or a .32auto conversion from Sportsmans guide, or handload.

If anyone is aware of the pressure issue in a small-ring Mauser, and he proceeds to frag himself, I have no sympathy except to issue a Darwin Award.

Vern Humphrey
January 5, 2012, 03:21 PM
however REALLY, the weapons are marked for 7.62 ammo with max pressures of 49,700 psi CUP vs. 52,000 psi CUP.

What the aitch ee double hockey sticks is "psi CUP?"

68caliberkiller
January 12, 2012, 09:27 AM
Thought I'd throw in a pic of my FR8 find. Sporterized and parkerized by someone else, worth less because its no longer original, but so much more useful with a scope! Its what I wanted, I wasn't gonna pay the $350 plus collectors value and then grind sites off and carve furniture...found on GB for $275 about 2 years ago. I just shoot CETME 7.62 loads cause I'd hate to blow her up.

http://s1204.photobucket.com/albums/bb410/gtojohn1965/FR8%20Sporterized/?action=view&current=LG1jan-12051.jpg
http://i1204.photobucket.com/albums/bb410/gtojohn1965/FR8%20Sporterized/LG1jan-12051.jpg

NCsmitty
January 12, 2012, 11:25 AM
There is little to worry about with FR-8/M43 Spanish Mausers, because they are full blown, large ring, M98 design, and can handle the 7.62x51 Nato ammo as well as most 308 Win.

IMO, the small ring versions including the FR-7 in 7.62, are the ones that I would be concerned about, when using anything other than the CETME ammo that the Spaniard's selected to use in the conversions. CETME ammo used a lighter, plastic core bullet at lower pressure than the 7.62x51 Nato. The Nato ammo was introduced in 1954.


NCsmitty

spence
January 12, 2012, 08:33 PM
I have an fr8-07721 fabrica de armas la coruna 1955. how can I tell if it is a small ring or a large ring for sure ? I looks just the one in the fotos but there is no hole in the side of the ring. I thought it was a large ring because it is marked fr8. But after reading these posts i'm not sure any more. Thanks

35 Whelen
January 12, 2012, 08:37 PM
I have an fr8-07721 fabrica de armas la coruna 1955. how can I tell if it is a small ring or a large ring for sure ? I looks just the one in the fotos but there is no hole in the side of the ring. I thought it was a large ring because it is marked fr8. But after reading these posts i'm not sure any more. Thanks
If it's stamped FR-8, it's a large ring '98.

35W

Vern Humphrey
January 13, 2012, 10:23 AM
The large ring action is 1.410" diameter, the small ring 1.300".

Fullboar1
January 13, 2012, 02:10 PM
99% of Small Ring Mausers that have blown up was because of Head Space problems, like has been said they dont vent gases from ruptured cases well at all. The first thing I do when buying a new second hand rifle (especially an old mauser) is have the head space checked. A hell of a large number of Spanish Mausers were converted to 308 and if you have it checked for head space and it's good I would think you would have no problems firing factory 308 ammo through it but I think firing mild handloads is a even better idea.

You can find alot of 308 load data on the Hodgdon website from 110 to 180 grain bullets with a number of different brand powders that will be under 40 000 PSI I am sure you can find a number of good loads that work in your rifle.
http://data.hodgdon.com/cartridge_load.asp

valnar
February 27, 2012, 08:39 AM
Sorry to bring back this thread to life, but I need the experts.

Since the 8mm mauser surplus ammo is drying up, this Spanish Mauser in .308 intrigues me. Is this based on the small or large ring? How can you tell?

http://www.samcoglobal.com/1-1916.html

R.W.Dale
February 27, 2012, 09:27 AM
Sorry to bring back this thread to life, but I need the experts.

Since the 8mm mauser surplus ammo is drying up, this Spanish Mauser in .308 intrigues me. Is this based on the small or large ring? How can you tell?

http://www.samcoglobal.com/1-1916.html

The m1916 is a small ring Mauser. An easy ID can be made by comparing its safety and cocking piece to one from a large ring.

posted via tapatalk using android.

mookiie
February 27, 2012, 09:31 AM
The 1916 is a small ring mauser, the 1893 version in 7mm was re-arsenaled to 7.62x51mm or a 308 win at 50,000 or less pressure. So commercial 308 is not a good option as it is at like 60,000 preassure.

Vern Humphrey
February 27, 2012, 09:33 AM
The Spanish M1916 is a small ring Mauser and is chambered for the 7.62 CTME cartridge. It is the same as the M95 Mauser action, but made in Spain.

From Jerry KKuhnhausen's The Mause Bolt Actions, page 85:
To compound the problem, a 7.62X51 mm NATO (or .308 Wincnester) cartridge will chamber in a 1916 Model 7.62 CTME chamber. However, the 7.62X51 mm NATO or the .308 Winchester can generate pressure of about 55,200 CUP. This pressure range is dangerous even in a well heat-treated German or Swedish made small ring M91-96 Mauser action but in my opinion can be particularly dangerous in the much softer Spanish made actions.
(Emphasis in the original.)

valnar
February 27, 2012, 10:53 AM
Rats. OK, thanks.

mookiie
February 27, 2012, 12:45 PM
All I shot 39 grns of IMR 4064, with a 147 grn FMJ-BT .308 projectile and LC once fired 308 brass. At 100 yards the ammo performed fine in the rifle. It was noticeable off, shooting about 8 inches below point of aim and about 5 - 6 to the left, but it shoot consistently in that area. I plan on seeing how accurate I can get the loads once I find a better sighting system to mount on this rifle. I saw no signs of damage to the receiver or any indications of high pressure from the brass.

NCsmitty
February 27, 2012, 01:55 PM
I shot 39 grns of IMR 4064, with a 147 grn FMJ-BT

You do have room to increase the charge a bit, according to www.hodgdon.com.
They list 43gr of IMR4064 and 150gr bullet, as a starting load, with around 45,000 PSI. I see no reason not to increase the load a couple grains over what you're loading now and try it. The rifle may shoot closer to your POA, than what you are seeing now. That's your call.


NCsmitty

mookiie
February 27, 2012, 04:17 PM
Thanks NCsmitty. I know I had more room I have a Lyman manual that lists pressure. I will reload the 50 I shot with a few more grains, but I didn't really try adjusting the sights on the rifle so I may be able to dial it in closer to Point of impact. I was really only looking for proof of concept when I took it out last time. So i did not spend to much time fiddling with it.

35 Whelen
February 27, 2012, 08:44 PM
Rats. OK, thanks.

Like others have said, it's based on small ring, but don't panic. After all the panic and doom-saying generated by this post, I e-mailed Samco and asked them about their 1916 rifles. It took them a little over a month to respond, but here's the correspondence:

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: 1916 Spanish Mauser
From: XXXX <XXXXXXX@yahoo.com>
Date: Mon, January 02, 2012 9:36 am
To: samco@samcoglobal.com

Sir or Madam:
There has been for years much heated discussion on the internet
regarding the safety of the 1916 Mausers chambered in .308 Winchester
such as the examples your company sells. If memory serves, they had been
proof tested and had been found safe. Are the rifles you sell headspaced
and do you have information regarding the strength of these actions? I seem
to recall an article in a gun magazine regarding the rifles you sell.
I actually own one of these rifles purchased from an individual,
shoot normal .308 Winchester ammunition through it, have had zero
problems, and am very pleased with it. I personally feel the rifles are
quite safe, but wanted to ask the importer directly.
Thank you,
XXXX

Their response:

Hi,

Attached please find a copy of our article in regards to our Spanish

SAMCO GLOBAL ARMS, INC
WWW.SAMCOGLOBAL.COM
6995 N.W. 43rd Street
Miami, Fl U.S.A. 33166
Toll-Free Order Line#: 1-(800)-554-1618
PH#: 1-305-593-9782
FAX#: 1-305-593-1014

And the article they attached (pay particular attention to the fourth paragraph):
160057

As I'm sure you read, it took in excess of 98,000 psi to destroy the rifles.

If you're still worried, keep your loads within the pressure parameters of the cartridge that was originally chambered in the original small ring actions shortly before the turn of the 20th century; the 7x57 Mauser whose average pressure back then was 50,370 CUP.

Lyman's 49th manual and Hodgdon's webpage has plenty of data whose pressures do not exceed the above amount. There is one little twist however: as I stated, I own both an FR-8 and a 1916 and have handloaded and chronographed many, many loads through both rifles. They both have VERY long thoats which tends to lowers chamber pressures (think Weatherby and their freebored barrels) as indicated by my chronograph data. Point is, you'll experience lower velocities, due to lower pressures, than indicated in the data or in the case of factory ammo, than in their specs.

Good luck,
35W

mookiie
February 28, 2012, 12:56 AM
35wheelen - I've already posted that article - scroll to page one of the thread.

Ignition Override
February 28, 2012, 01:36 AM
Some posters seem to put both the FR7 and FR8 into the exact same group when using general descriptions, and appear to not differentiate between them, when comparing ammo pressures.

The appearance of both unique rifles is so similar-other than the FR7 having a bent bolt and the FR8 (normally) a straight bolt-has helped lead to generalizations on several website discussions.

A very detailed discussion a few months ago ("refreshed" from about '07), over at Surplusrifle, was very interesting.
The main contributor stated that he worked for some type of ammo research or other testing lab lab in Canada.

One of his main points was that old military "CUP" is often mistakenly interpreted to mean "PSI", because even though CUP is a type of pressure measurement, people assume that it must be the same as (Saami) PSI-which uses a different system. The Nato 7.62 (actual psi) often is indicated up to about 58,000 psi, whereas modern comm. .308 can be a max. of about 62,000 psi.

Anyway, the gent who was in the very long thread told me that he also has an FR8, and (along with numerous other posters) that the Spanish designed the reduced pressure 7.62 CETME round after the FR8 was designed, to reduce felt recoil and flinching among new Spanish recruits. The gun has the same chamber and barrel (but fake gas tube/clean. comp.) as the G-3, which uses Nato 7.62.

He also owns this type of rifle and has no concerns using modern commercial .308 ammo, due to the strength of the very strong 8mm Mauser action, very good headspace (brass checked often), and matching bolt which indicates that the bolts' lugs can have more reliable contact that what can happen with mis-matched bolts, etc.

Anyway, to clarify, the FR7 might Look identical, other than the bent bolt, but the action is from the much older, much weaker small-ring action.

SlamFire1
February 28, 2012, 05:52 PM
the 7x57 Mauser whose average pressure back then was 50,370 CUP.

A couple of threads ago I found the 1898 vintage report that a similiar number came from. The load was a 173 grain bullet going 2200 fps, not exactly moving fast in today's world. You would think 50,000 (was it psi?) would zing that bullet out faster, especially out of a 29" barrel.

While fps is fps, what I do not know if the CUP measurements taken in 1898 are comparable to today.

Pressure measurements with chrusher equipment is very specific to equipment, copper slugs, and I have no idea of the calibration standards in 1898 and whether they are traceable to the way CUP is measured today.

Anyone know pre 1900 pressure calibration standards and technics?

Anyway SAMCO is still selling the M1916's https://www.samcoglobal.com/1-1916.html I would not expect them to be anything but very positive about their inventory.

valnar
February 28, 2012, 06:08 PM
I found this gun (http://www.gunbroker.com/Auction/ViewItem.aspx?Item=275560387) on Gunbroker, which is said to be made from a large ring Mauser, unlike the Samco models. Although at that price, it's now getting into the territory of a modern bolt action, so I don't know if I would want to pay the price.

mookiie
February 28, 2012, 07:15 PM
Valnar - that s a Spanish model fr8 large ring Mauser a different rfle than the m1916 Spanish model discussed above as a small ring Mauser. The FR8 large ring Mauser should be fine with win 308 pressures.

If you enjoyed reading about "Spainish m1916 MAuser 7.52 NATO vs 308 Win" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!