Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Ask The Gunwriters FN Mauser Belgium 1950 Mauser 30-06,oppinion ?

I am curious about the heat-treating too, as have owned more than a few of those JCH actions and never had any problems. But then I didn't pay anybody to engrave them, and don't normally try to turn .30-06's into .300 magnums.

As a side note, one of them had an old .270 Winchester factory round blow a hole through it's side-wall, just above the case head, when I was shooting it. Despite being an "H-ring" all I felt was a slight bit of hot gas on the area of my left cheekbone.

Phil and John,
There is a lot of bull**** out in internet land about Mausers and steel and hardness. What I know I got from Tom Burgess, Jerry Fisher, Ted Blackburn, and Mark Penrod. Tom thought the 1949 and 1950 "C" were the best 98's ever made. Penrod recently told me they were made of 4140 rather than the material the original Mauser's had been made of. Of course 4140 is the same steel in M70's and is considered ordinance steel cause it is commonly used for actions barrels etc. Jerry told me he does not like the JC Higgins FN's because he has had some that were way to hard. His concern has nothing to do with engraving. Mausers were designed to have a very hard skin and a soft core which is why they were made of steel to be case hardened or carburized, which means to have a hard thin skin. The new GMA actions are very good...made of 8620 and then cased so as to have a hard tough skin but a ductile core. They are expensive but really great. They are also very precisely made.
Obviously, many of the double broached later FN 's are ok but it is not rare to find an old Weatherby that has set back because it is too soft or shot with hot ammo.
Blackburn, towards the end of this career refused to turn a Mauser into a .532 magnum. Best leave them as 30-06, 270, 9.3-62, etc. Tom felt the same. While it could be done it was not preferred.

Thanks for the reply, I have the utmost respect for the quality and integrity of all the smiths you mentioned but still wonder if they might have possibly got a poor example as I have seen examples of in the white FN actions offered for sale as "not heat treated" .

And Weatherby's are not the only examples of Mausers that show set-back. I have seen it in numerous Military actions as well as on Mk X's. And most had been converted to magnum length.

Ditto!

And since this forum is also discussing Swedish "potato tossers" I just had my son's newest acquisition ( a Husky 9.3x57) apart and it is built on a M 98 action with FN proofs and a C ring.

Rick and Phil,

I�m addressing you both in this post because it seems we�re the 3 most involved in this particular part of the thread .

I know many top gunsmiths who would disagree with the assessment of other top gunsmiths. In fact I know one top gunsmith who apprenticed with one of the four guys Rick mentions, but disagrees with several notions of his mentor because he's tested them and found them wanting, despite his mentor�s long experience.

I didn't get my ideas on commercial Mauser 98 actions off the Internet, but from various top gunsmiths, including Dave Gentry, who knew more about 98's than any gunsmith I've known. Dave MADE 98 actions, including left-hand, "Kurz" and magnum versions, many of which were used by various custom smiths as well as famous British gun companies. He also probably built more rifles on 98 actions of various sorts than most "traditional" smiths, because he started making synthetic-stocked rifles very early on, using his own layups.

Dave not only had the highest regard for ANY 98 actions made by FN, but also thought Mark X's were made of very good steel, even if some were roughly machined (though he also had an early Mark X that was as finely finished as any FN I�ve seen). He tested every 98 action he used, and if reheat-treating was needed sent them to the same company recommended in Jerry Kuhnhausen�s book, THE MAUSER BOLT ACTIONS, A SHOP MANUAL.

Kuhnhausen also doesn�t mention any frequent problems with commercial FN actions, though he does mention the differences in steel between early 98�s and post-WWII actions. There�s far more detail about the subject in R.A. Walsh�s book on making sporting rifles, MAUSER MODEL 98 AND 96. Walsh is a top-notch engineer who makes custom Mauser rifles on the side, and knows more about Mauser steel than most gunsmiths. He doesn�t mention any consistent problem with the steel in later commercial actions either.

I know that engineers disagree (one friend says the definition of two engineers in the same room is �an argument�), partly because I recently had two engineers write me about a technical point in one of my articles. One said the result was due to too-short headspace, and the other said the headspace was too long! I�ve seen the same thing with gunsmiths, so am naturally slightly skeptical about the opinions of even the legendary list in Rick�s post.

One of my own guesses about problems with many commercial Mauser actions, especially those used for belted magnum cartridges, is that many if not most have been due to factory rifles where locking lug contact wasn�t checked. One of the examples in de Haas�s BOLT ACTION RIFLES is a cracked locking lug on a .300 Weatherby, but that could have easily happened if only one lug was bearing. Dave Gentry built a bunch of his �affordable� Roughrider rifles, which used the Mark X action, in various belted magnum rounds, including the .300 Weatherby and .375 H&H, with never a problem. But he also made sure bolt lugs were firmly bearing.

Might also mention that the original .375 H&H rifles made by Holland and Holland used standard-length actions from the Mauser Werke, and were noted for their reliability. Then there was the legendary .416 Rigby owned and used by Harry Selby for many years, which was also made on a standard 98 action. Admittedly the .416 is a low-pressure cartridge, but it is a LOT bigger around than any belted magnum, and Selby used his for decades (often in very hot weather), with no problems.

As Jack O�Connor once said, anybody who thinks they know everything about Mauser actions is in for some surprises. I am a big Mauser fan, and am surprised every year.

Thank you gentlemen.

Appreciate the discussion on Mauser technicana

Thanks John, My experiences pretty well mirror yours.
We are both well aware that just because one or more experts, or gun writers, claims it is true does not make it so.

John and Phil,
Burgess thought the Mark X actions were among the toughest he had ever encountered. I had a chance to buy a Mark X barreled action in 458 for $195. Wish I had done that.

The 98's rarely are a problem if they are left at the .473 head size cartridges. Also, in the days when the military and FN Mausers were commonly used, the standard load development technique was to load until there were obvious marks on the case head or the bolt had to be pounded open or the primer was pretty flat and then back off a grain or two. Handloaders routinely ran pressures that were way too high. Those actions never gave way. On the other hand I have seen several pre 64's that let go and when they did there were lots of flying chucks of metal. A guy I knew from that era ran 160 Partitions out of his 7RM AT 3250! I know cause he ran his loads over my chronograph. Scared me.

The complaints that I have heard about the double broached FN's related to only a few actions but those guys had very little tolerance for things that were not just exactly right.

Phil,
Speaking of actions that are not hardened. When you buy a Hagn action or an FZH Mauser or some of those other currently manufactured Mausers, which are pretty high dollar items, you will note in the fine print that they need to be hardened by the purchaser. There is a certain amount of movement in the parts during that process, I hesitate to call it warpage, but there is some pretty delicate hand fitting that is needed after the very expensive rifle is darn near done. That is why more "modern" actions are made from prehardened blanks.

John,
While I really like your source who had associated with my sources, he has made very few rifles not even close to the volume of Gentry.

In the end, who knows? I have become a Remington clone convert.

Rick,

Yeah, that's one of the problems with many high-end custom rifle makers: They don't have as near as much experience with various actions, since they don't make nearly as many rifles as some guys who make rifles costing 1/4 as much. Consequently any bad experience with a certain make of action gets magnified.

You should have heard Dave Gentry on pre-'64's!

My .375 H&H is based on Mark X barreled action I got for $225 in the early 1990's.

I am also a fan of 700's and their clones, though at least one of the high-$$ clones isn't all it's been cracked up to be on the Internet either. Learned that from one of those custom gunmakers who makes a lot of synthetic-stocked rifles. Oh, and I've even taken dangerous game with a Remington 700 and lived to tell about it....

John,
If I had bought that Mark X 458 barreled action, I could trade it to Phil for a bear hunt...laughing!!! How about it a Phil?
Best to you both,
Rick

Rick, I was aware that a number of high end actions needed to be hardened before being put into use and there is considerable difference in opinions between a number of top end builders as whether or not to re-harden old actions.

And while I don't consider myself a M-700 "fan", I will acknowledge it's many good features and some of the best "clones" pretty well clean up all it's weaknesses. With equal amount of time and attention to detail as a Mauser requires, the best Remington clones give up little, if anything, in reliability and certainly up the accuracy potential.

I have been mighty happy with my Mk X 458, and have a second one in reserve, so will probably have to pass. The rifle that currently has my attention is the GMA 33-40 9.3x62 that Joe Smithson built. I want to see your 30-06 like it when it is done.

If a man wanted to learn all he could about Mausers(and I do)which 2 or 3 books should I get?
Craig

Well, I looked again at this FN, and realized it's got plenty of rust starting on it At least I only have $300 in it. I wiped it down with Break Free to stop the rust.

I reckon I'll see how it shoots, then go from there as to how best to restore it. I'd rather not D&T that nice FN logo on the front receiver ring, so I think it may wind up with a receiver sight..and maybe as a Whelan, or a 9.3x62





It is only a 4 digit serial number; I cannot find a year of mfg, so I may take some close up photos of the proof marks.

If it has a rear sight and you want to use an optic I think that scope mounts are made the attach to the rear sight and then use a pistol scope on it or intermediate eye relief scope and not have to drill and tap.

http://www.amazon.com/Scout-Weaver-Mauser-Series-Rifles/dp/B001G8ZPUA

http://www.brownells.com/optics-mou...ses/mauser-98-scope-mount-prod22431.aspx

http://www.scopemounts.com/index.html?instapics.html

Craig, I would say that Mauser Bolt Rifles by Ludwig Olson and Jerry Kuhnhausen's shop manual The Mauser bolt Action, both available and affordable from Brownells are the best books to start from.

if you get further into the subject all three of John Speed's books are superb but rapidly becoming collectors items.

Thank you Phil,appreciate it.
Craig

Tex n cal,
That rifle you have pictured is without question one of the best ever. It is a 1949-1950 "c" ring action. Treat it kindly but use it. Don't ever part with it, at least if you want a fine Mauser. If you get tired of it let me know.
Rick
PS to my knowledge they were only made in 30-06 & 270.

This has all been very interesting, and a good bit to digest at one sitting.

If I might give the pot one final stir, let me ask how you gentlemen regard the CZs, which I believe have the "C" broaching, in comparison to the FNs and Zastavas?

I'm getting to the age where I'm not likely to "need" any more rifles (the same age as JB), but there might just be one more episode of Mauser lust left in me and a CZ, perhaps fitted with the Gentry safety and shroud seems like a good way to cool me off with a minimum of time and trouble.

Thanks.

Gary