Which would you buy?

[Appalachiannative]

So I'm torn between two guns at the moment... Both are chambered in 7mm Mauser. Both antiques both in fit enough condition to shoot. I love military surplus stuff and both fit to shoot. One is a sporterized Chilean Mauser bolt action and the other is an original Remington rolling block made for the Mexican army. The rolling block costs more. Both are about the same age. I could have a lot of fun with either but I don't want to spend the money on both. Just curious what others would do in this situation. Regardless of which one I get they would just be another piece in my collection shot mostly for fun perhaps occasionally used for deer hunting although I'm not really much of a big game guy.

 

[gudaki]

Rolling block iwould be my choice.

 

[potmetal]

For a hunting rifle, the Mauser makes more sense. You have quicker follow up shots if needed. For the "cool factor". I think the Remington would be my choice. A local shop has one right now, priced at $1100. Just a little out of my budget.

 

[4v50 Gary]

If the Remington rolling block was beat up, I'd get that as a project. Rebarrel and restock. If not, I wouldn't alter it but would go after the Chilean Mauser.

 

[winfreeokra]

Sounds like a buy both, shoot both for bit with intentions of selling off one based on pleasure factor. Ultimately keep both and live happily ever after situation.

If it’s truly a “limited” hunting situation and only one is in the cards then go with the one that draws your eye more.

 

[NIGHTLORD40K]

Rolling block

 

[Ru4real]

Yes

 

[Appalachiannative]

Sounds like a buy both, shoot both for bit with intentions of selling off one based on pleasure factor. Ultimately keep both and live happily ever after situation.

If it’s truly a “limited” hunting situation and only one is in the cards then go with the one that draws your eye more.

Dang I like that answer. I feel like both might be for sale long enough for me to scrape up the cash now that I have your idea in my mind. Perhaps get the rolling block then keep fingers crossed no one will buy the bolt action

 

[courtgreene]

I’d go mauser, but this is pretty much a personal preference situation.

 

[winfreeokra]

I think you just answered what’s coming home first. Got an extra $50 for layaway on the other. I hate for people to be in gun debt but there are avenues to wants without everyone in the family suffering. Couple months of Saturdays delivering pizza paid for a few of my toys/trips over the years.

 

[Appalachiannative]

I think you just answered what’s coming home first. Got an extra $50 for layaway on the other. I hate for people to be in gun debt but there are avenues to wants without everyone in the family suffering. Couple months of Saturdays delivering pizza paid for a few of my toys/trips over the years.

Lol I got voluntary Saturdays at the warehouse or weekends spent cleaning up on the ground with a roofing crew for $150 a day cash to support my activities

 

[Speedo66]

Plenty of bolt actions around, the rolling block has a unique factor the bolt action doesn't.

Plus the investment potential of an original gun vs. a sporterized one.

 

[theotherwaldo]

I've got one of those '95 Chilean Short Rifles.
it's a great little gun.
I'd still like to get an un-cut rolling block, though,,, ,

 

[Jim Watson]

The Mauser is a better gun but unless a really really nice sporterizing job, I would lean toward the Remington for fun.

Will you buy or reload 7x57? There are legends of 7mm specifications being changed or not closely followed in the Rolling Block and that they have HEADSPACE. Horrors.

 

[Shanghai McCoy]

All things being relatively equal, I'd go for the original rolling block first.

 

[Dave DeLaurant]

No bad answers here, but I personally would do the Rolling Block.

Unless we're talking about something like a G&H sporterized Springfield, altered military rifles have remained a flat market in recent years while original condition milsurps have increased significantly in value.

If the Mexican RB is in good original condition inside and out, that's a major bonus -- while nowhere near as rough as the present crop of Ethiopian imports, a lot of Mexican surplus has been used pretty hard before reaching the US market.

FWIW, a 7x57 RB carbine has long been on my bucket list -- I've only seen a couple in decent condition to date, and both carried stratospheric prices.

 

[AK Hunter]

The original Remington rolling block would hold it's value longer.

 

[tark]

Know that the early 7mm cartridges were not the same. One was slightly longer than the other. Rolling blocks can be found in both, and you have to determine which one your potential purchase is chambered for. Firing modern ammo in a rifle chambered for the longer case will result in a case that is horribly stretched to near the point of failure. I had one of these, years ago which I sold for parts. A quick test is to chamber a round and see if the rear of the case is exactly flush with the rear of the chamber. If it appears to sit .010" or so below the rear of the chamber it is probably chambered for the wrong cartridge. The only real way to be sure is to fire a round of ammo and see if the case looks normal. The early UMCC rounds in the pic worked fine in my early roller, which was chambered for the longer round. For what it's worth, my current gun is stamped, " CAL. 7mm. " on top of the barrel just ahead of the wood. My earlier gun had no stamp. If your prospective purchase has this stamp, I suspect it is good to go.

Having said that, the smokeless powder 1897 and 1902 rolling blocks are very desirable and sought after by BPCR competitors. The action is capable of digesting 45,000 PSI cartridges, and were chambered in 30-30, 30-40, 7.65 Argentine, 8mm Lebel, 7.62X54 Russian and .303 British in addition to 7mm Mauser. Despite what WIKI says, they were never chambered in 30-06.

These guns had a very fast twist and deep rifling. They are rarely found with a mint bore. Mine is a bit dark, with moderate pitting the entire length of the bore. It shoots just fine. It still has a bit of case hardening color visible on the action. Notice the screw heads, all pristine. If they are buggered up someone has been at work with an ill fitted screwdriver. There was no reason to disassemble these guns unless a spring broke. As one can see in the pics, mine is in average, well used but not abused condition. There is some parts overlap between between the 1897 and 1902 versions. Mine has the 1897 rear sight and the 1902 fore end cap. The 1902s had a ladder rear sight.

These guns had no serial numbers.

If you lean toward the Chilean Mauser, make sure the bolt matches. It was common for South American dictators to store the bolts separate from the guns, serial numbers be damned. I have a nice Chilean, with a mismatched bolt. If yours has one demand that the seller lower the price. .

 

[gwpercle]

For hunting the Mauser sporter is more practical ... I have one and the small ring sporter makes into a nifty deer and hog rifle ... But ... Oh Yeah there is a but ... For just shooting I would love to have the Rolling Block and if not too long a barrel ... I could hunt deer with it ... I usually wait for a good shot and seldom need a second if the first shot is blown ,,,
To Heck with practicle ... get the Rolling Block ... Although I have wanted one for well over 50 years I was never in the right place with money when a Rolling Block came along and thus ...never did get one .
Don't miss this opprotunity to pick up the rolling block ... jump on it !
Gary

 

[BigBlue 94]

No contest... Rolling Block!

I found myself in a similar situation once. A 1943 Remington 03A3 or an Enfield No1 Mk4 (or something like that). I chose the Remington and have no regrets.

 

[bannockburn]

Yet another vote in favor of the Rolling Block. If the Chilean Mauser was still in it's original condition then I might have been tempted to go for it. As things stand, provided the Rolling Block checks out okay, I would get it over the sporterized Mauser.

 

[Appalachiannative]

Know that the early 7mm cartridges were not the same. One was slightly longer than the other. Rolling blocks can be found in both, and you have to determine which one your potential purchase is chambered for. Firing modern ammo in a rifle chambered for the longer case will result in a case that is horribly stretched to near the point of failure. I had one of these, years ago which I sold for parts. A quick test is to chamber a round and see if the rear of the case is exactly flush with the rear of the chamber. If it appears to sit .010" or so below the rear of the chamber it is probably chambered for the wrong cartridge. The only real way to be sure is to fire a round of ammo and see if the case looks normal. The early UMCC rounds in the pic worked fine in my early roller, which was chambered for the longer round. For what it's worth, my current gun is stamped, " CAL. 7mm. " on top of the barrel just ahead of the wood. My earlier gun had no stamp. If your prospective purchase has this stamp, I suspect it is good to go.

Having said that, the smokeless powder 1897 and 1902 rolling blocks are very desirable and sought after by BPCR competitors. The action is capable of digesting 45,000 PSI cartridges, and were chambered in 30-30, 30-40, 7.65 Argentine, 8mm Lebel, 7.62X54 Russian and .303 British in addition to 7mm Mauser. Despite what WIKI says, they were never chambered in 30-06.

These guns had a very fast twist and deep rifling. They are rarely found with a mint bore. Mine is a bit dark, with moderate pitting the entire length of the bore. It shoots just fine. It still has a bit of case hardening color visible on the action. Notice the screw heads, all pristine. If they are buggered up someone has been at work with an ill fitted screwdriver. There was no reason to disassemble these guns unless a spring broke. As one can see in the pics, mine is in average, well used but not abused condition. There is some parts overlap between between the 1897 and 1902 versions. Mine has the 1897 rear sight and the 1902 fore end cap. The 1902s had a ladder rear sight.

These guns had no serial numbers.

If you lean toward the Chilean Mauser, make sure the bolt matches. It was common for South American dictators to store the bolts separate from the guns, serial numbers be damned. I have a nice Chilean, with a mismatched bolt. If yours has one demand that the seller lower the price. .

this is a model 1897 7mm stamped on it with an excellent bore

 

[Bill M.]

I actually have owned both. First off, neither is going to shoot well with factory 170 grain bullets. I did not reload at the time and that is what they sold locally. Both guns hit sideways at 30 yards or so. If I could have one back it would be…? I liked both of them at that time but my tastes have changed. The Mauser for sure if you actually want to hunt with it.

My best answer is to get neither. Add the funds to something you really want.

My Winchester M 70 in .280 is a great step up over those 2 guns. In general I no longer like or appreciate crappy military guns.

 

[tark]

this is a model 1897 7mm stamped on it with an excellent bore

Then it is worth five times what the Chilean Mauser is. I assume the seller is asking four figures, if he isn't he should be. Assuming the gun is in as good a shape as the bore. Any way you can post a pic?

 

[Bcwitt]

Dont worry about head space. Just form brass ftom 3006 & put the shoulder in the new location.