Are the '91 to '96 Mausers really that dangerous in terms of a case rupture, if you are wearing shooting glasses or even sunglasses? The little gas shield ring on the '98 Mauser bolt does not seem to offer much more safety, if you are already wearing eye protection.
Pre-98 Mausers and case rupture safety?
- Thread starter pirate do
- Start date
- Status
morcey2
Member
I depends a lot on the specific action. The thumb cutout for stripper clips has a secondary function of rerouting some of the hot gasses out of the action. The ring on the bolt shroud is secondary to some other features. There are usually two oval holes on the bottom of the bolt that routes gasses out of the bolt down into the magazine in the event of a pierced primer.
The spanish 1916s have a hole on the side of the receiver a la 1903 Hatcher Hole that is supposed to help quite a bit. I believe that there are others that have similar features.
If you're wearing safety glasses, I don't think you have a whole lot to worry about, but it probably isn't fun regardless. I wouldn't classify them as "dangerous", just not quite as robust.
Matt
The spanish 1916s have a hole on the side of the receiver a la 1903 Hatcher Hole that is supposed to help quite a bit. I believe that there are others that have similar features.
If you're wearing safety glasses, I don't think you have a whole lot to worry about, but it probably isn't fun regardless. I wouldn't classify them as "dangerous", just not quite as robust.
Matt
R.W.Dale
Member
Let me put it this way. I have no problem shooting them but I would NEVER do so without ANSI approved eye protection.
That gas vent may help on a pierced or blown primer but in the event of a ruptured case the path of least resistance for all that superheated gas is still the bolt raceways and right into your face.
That gas vent may help on a pierced or blown primer but in the event of a ruptured case the path of least resistance for all that superheated gas is still the bolt raceways and right into your face.
Last edited:
morcey2
Member
1895 Chilean (and I think some other 1895s) had a small notch in which the root of the bolt handle sat. It wasn't a whole lot of extra strength, but would still help in case the two main locking lugs let go.
Matt
Here are some nice small ring blowup pictures:
I also have some nice large ring mauser blow up pictures. I cannot say that small ring actions blow up at a higher frequency than large rings, but the safety features in the large ring mausers do protect the shooter more from gas release assuming the action does not fail catastrophically. If the action fails catastrophically then what you have is an explosion, parts flying around, and the action type is not going to matter much.
I have had lots of pierced primers from over pressure surplus 8mm ammunition and the gas blocking features that Paul Mauser installed protected me and my eyes.
Mauser updated the features in his actions and the 98 action is a safer action than earlier actions. However, all of these early actions suffer from inferior materials and they were made under primitive process controls. Additional, these actions were all made of plain carbon steels. Compared to alloy steels, plain carbon steels do not heat treat evenly (shallow hardening), the yield is lower and elongation before rupture is less. No one in his right mind makes rifle receivers from such low grade materials anymore. Modern receivers have better breeching and are made from better materials with better heat treatments. Even though the gas handling on a M70 is in the same class as a small ring mauser, the receiver rings stay intact simply due to better materials.
I also have some nice large ring mauser blow up pictures. I cannot say that small ring actions blow up at a higher frequency than large rings, but the safety features in the large ring mausers do protect the shooter more from gas release assuming the action does not fail catastrophically. If the action fails catastrophically then what you have is an explosion, parts flying around, and the action type is not going to matter much.
I have had lots of pierced primers from over pressure surplus 8mm ammunition and the gas blocking features that Paul Mauser installed protected me and my eyes.
Mauser updated the features in his actions and the 98 action is a safer action than earlier actions. However, all of these early actions suffer from inferior materials and they were made under primitive process controls. Additional, these actions were all made of plain carbon steels. Compared to alloy steels, plain carbon steels do not heat treat evenly (shallow hardening), the yield is lower and elongation before rupture is less. No one in his right mind makes rifle receivers from such low grade materials anymore. Modern receivers have better breeching and are made from better materials with better heat treatments. Even though the gas handling on a M70 is in the same class as a small ring mauser, the receiver rings stay intact simply due to better materials.
barnetmill
Member
- Joined
- Jun 6, 2006
- Messages
- 1,264
SlamFire1: Great photos. Did the action stay locked for the small ring pre-98. I say small pre98 since there are small ring 98's out there also like the mexican mauser 98s that have the advanced metal treatment and also the third locking lug. It looks like that blown gun had been sporterized and who knows what sort of loads were put into it. Small ring pre98's are ok if you use them within the pressures that they designed to handle. Still one should wear safety glasses when using them. All of my correction lenses are OHSA rated.
Jim Watson
Member
Scary.
Do you have any intelligence on the cause of the blowups?
Was it just their day to let go, as is commonly implied, or did it take something dumb or very unlucky with the ammunition?
Do you have any intelligence on the cause of the blowups?
Was it just their day to let go, as is commonly implied, or did it take something dumb or very unlucky with the ammunition?
morcey2
Member
The bottom set of pics in SlamFire1's post are of an FR-7. It's chambered in 7.62x51, but if I owned one it would be relegated to reduced loads and lead boolits. It should be safe shooting 7.62x51 which runs at 50k psi but many are marked "308 Win" which runs at a higher pressure (62k psi) and a tighter chamber. The actual rounds produced are generally sized to fit either chamber but the higher pressure is well beyond the capabilities of a pre-98 mauser. 50k is right at the edge but I know many people who have shot hundreds of 7.62x51 rounds through an FR-7 with no issue. If it was an FR-8, it probably would have held together unless, of course, someone accidentally loaded a case full of 2400 or AA-2. Even then, I don't think the receiver ring would have exploded that way.
Matt
Matt
Arkansas Paul
Member
Agreed.
My dad has a small ring in .308/7.62x51 and we shot full throttle factory ammo through it for years before we learned that it wasn't a good idea. Now we only shoot the Hodgdon "Youth Loads" through it to be on the safe side.
10 to 1 someone was shooting hot loads in these rifles. I have been shooting both Mauser designs for 50 years with zero problems. I follow the reloading manual and reload for accuracy, not velocity. Did anyone bother to check headspace?.....chris3
morcey2
Member
The headspace on the FR-7 would be part of the issue. Even with correct headspace for 7.65x51, it would have swallowed a 308 Win No-Go and possibly Field gauges. Not a good combination when the 308 is loaded to higher pressures. I do agree that they were probably shooting hot loads.
Matt
R.W.Dale
Member
And THIS is exactly what lands a small ring owner in the ER!
7.62NATO and 308win are in fact loaded to the same pressure nominally.
Folks have been confused by 308v7.62 for years because of the simple fact that the .gov uses the copper crusher method to determine pressure and calls the resultant measurement "psi" instead of CUP as with SAAMI
Think about it. If 7.62x51 was held to 50k psi (actual) its performance would look A LOT more like 30-30 than 308
desidog
Member
- Joined
- Nov 21, 2008
- Messages
- 2,595
Not really. The Fr-7 (& FR-8) were chambered for 7,62 CETME. 7.62x51NATO did not exist yet...NATO did not exist yet. While the chamberings have similar exterior dimensions, the chamber pressures vary by about 20,000PSI... and if anyone stamped ".308win" on one of those receivers, they ought to be held criminally liable.
Cosmoline
Member
It still matters, and there are hidden safety features even to early Mausers. Notice how the receiver blew out, but the force did not sheer the lugs or send the bolt back to kill the shooter. That didn't happen by accident.
Not that primitive. By the 1880's and 1890's the steels were being bade on an industrial scale with leaps and bounds in chemical and engineering science happening at breakneck pace. Engineers weren't entirely sure how well their rifles would hold up to the new white powder though, so most of these early smokeless rifles actually tend to be overbuilt and considerably stronger than they needed to be. That's how you end up with rifles that last through multiple world wars and endless abuses. Modern alloy steels permit costs to be brought down and allowed for things like stainless, but they aren't necessarily stronger or safer. Just a lot younger ;-) We'll see how they're doing in 2098, when the Mosins are still craking along.
Last edited:
silicosys4
Member
- Joined
- Jun 29, 2012
- Messages
- 3,714
I have an M96 Carl Gustav Mauser that was made in 1902. It was restocked by Kimber, and rebarreled as a ".308 winchester", then sold commercially.
It is a nice gun, but I have the same feelings as you do about shooting factory loads through it. IMO, it should have never been converted to a higher pressure round than the action was originally designed for.
I only shoot light reloads through it....and can't find any scope mounts for it, so even then, vary rarely.
silicosys4
Member
- Joined
- Jun 29, 2012
- Messages
- 3,714
I have an M96 Carl Gustav Mauser that was made in 1902. It was restocked by Kimber, and rebarreled as a ".308 winchester", then sold commercially.
It is a nice gun, but I have the same feelings as you do about shooting factory loads through it. IMO, it should have never been converted to a higher pressure round than the action was originally designed for.
I only shoot light reloads through it....and can't find any scope bases for it, so even then, vary rarely.
Jim Watson
Member
Every time the small ring Mauser debates start up, I think about those Kimbers.
They sold a lot of sporterized '96 Mausers. I don't know if Kimber did the work or a contractor, but they seem to be neat enough jobs of it.
Some were left in 6.5x55, no problem.
Others were rebarrelled to .22-250, .243, and .308.
Were they proof tested?
Did Kimber conclude that Swedish steel made them better than Spanish... or German? Their lawyer must have signed off on it.
Scope mounts? Do they not take standard bases for the action or did Kimber grind them to some odd contour?
I read some sites and find a lot of opinion that the FR7 and FR8 were built after Spain had already moved the CETME from 7.62 CETME to 7.62 NATO.
It wasn't like the Guardia Civil was going to be doing a lot of shooting and stressing the old actions a lot.
They sold a lot of sporterized '96 Mausers. I don't know if Kimber did the work or a contractor, but they seem to be neat enough jobs of it.
Some were left in 6.5x55, no problem.
Others were rebarrelled to .22-250, .243, and .308.
Were they proof tested?
Did Kimber conclude that Swedish steel made them better than Spanish... or German? Their lawyer must have signed off on it.
Scope mounts? Do they not take standard bases for the action or did Kimber grind them to some odd contour?
I read some sites and find a lot of opinion that the FR7 and FR8 were built after Spain had already moved the CETME from 7.62 CETME to 7.62 NATO.
It wasn't like the Guardia Civil was going to be doing a lot of shooting and stressing the old actions a lot.
silicosys4
Member
- Joined
- Jun 29, 2012
- Messages
- 3,714
Dunno about the scope bases. The receiver isn't reground, but it appears to be drilled in a different pattern...When I picked up a leopold set of bases for the "m96 swedish mauser" only the front one fit, the rear doesnt....and they appear to be at two different heights as well as being a strange drill pattern. I really just need to find someone who is more knowledgeable about such things to point me in the right direction.
I know that mount height front/rear can be an issue for rifles that were never meant to be drilled and tapped for a scope
Jim Watson
Member
The Blue Book says they were drilled and tapped for Weaver bases. Unfortunately they do not say which Weaver bases. Brownells says Weaver no 45 front, no 55 rear for a generic '96 Mauser. Maybe Kimber used the same hole spacing, but your experience with Leupold is not promising.
Sorry guys, I was lucky just to get the pictures, never got a failure analysis report.
Was that the same lawyer that signed off on their bankruptcy?
Sounds like a fan of older rifles. Well other than your enthusiasm, if you have some data to share about the maturity and quality of period materials and process, please share.
Was that the same lawyer that signed off on their bankruptcy?
Sounds like a fan of older rifles. Well other than your enthusiasm, if you have some data to share about the maturity and quality of period materials and process, please share.
Boxhead
Member
I shoot my Swede based 7x57 with loads that run a fair bit over SAAMI with zero worries. Top notch steel in these 96's.
I am a bit more cautious with the small ring/large thread Erfurt 8x57 given the dimensions and steel but still run a bit over SAAMI without worry too.
I am a bit more cautious with the small ring/large thread Erfurt 8x57 given the dimensions and steel but still run a bit over SAAMI without worry too.
briansmithwins
Member
- Joined
- Aug 1, 2005
- Messages
- 4,631
All it takes is one small piece of powder, steel, or case metal in the event of a rupture to make sure you get intimately acquainted with your eye surgeon, who is going to be sticking not only a needle but all sorts of interesting medical implements in your eye to retrieve the debris and/or repair the damage.
That's assuming the damage is repairable.
BSW
That's assuming the damage is repairable.
BSW
- Status
