Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Mausers and Military Rifles 1891 Argentine. 7.65x 53

Ran into one last week.
Someone kinda bubbafied it their version of customized.
Had a nice black walnut stock that needs some contouring and profiling, and most definatley refinishing.action bedded kinda slipshod into the stock but I can dress it up and fix it.
Sliding rear sight needs to be tensioned up.
Missing the screw on front sight ears.
Which was probably discarded when bubba half stocked it.
Bore and crown on it in vg shape.
All markings intact.
Graphite black cerracoat the metal.
Kinda reminded me of a rem model 7 in its size.
They wanted 175 .
I think I can slap down 160 otd.
Place is sucking on customers.
Kinda think I can project it and really make it look good.
Ammo on sgammo is available.

But accuracy research I did later on the web, kinda turned me away
3" to 5" groups most are seeming to say...



Anybody got any experience with the Argentine 1891 carbine and its accuracy???

Still thinking about it.
Be kinda a cool mauser to bring back to life, if anything just to have it.

The loose parts will affect accuracy as will the stock if is poorly fitted.
It sounds like a fun project.
Any military has good accuracy potential

I was searching accuracy with iron sights for it.
Here is a clip I found of one in original configuration.

The one I ran into had a customized civilian stock.
And didnt have top shroud wood
Those front sight ears were also missing.

But like the guy in this vid all the markings were intact and numbers matched

I might drop the hammer on it .

Then ya got this dude shooting one in a scoped scout rifle set up.
He seems to be having a hard time working the bolt maybe due to his handloads.


Kinda makes me think.
I can replace the triangle front sight with a straight post
And tap a receiver sight into it.
Like this dude did.
Dont want a brake on it.
And it would cut groups in half at least of the regular iron sight accuracy I was reading about.


I dunno

Gotta think about it some more.

Thinkiing a 308 is a bit much for the 91 there. The bolt working prob could be because of that. Always wanted an Argentine carbine complete. Way cool.

The factory loads for it on sgammo were 150 and 170 or 180 loads
Doing around 2500 to 2700 IIRC.

It does seem stout for a rifle of its size.

In that vid
He seemed like he had a hard time clambering and extracting rounds at times.
You can see a couple of pauses also while he was extracting a round.

Probably not a good thing to have pressure signs in your handloads in a 100 plus yr old rifle.

My uncle had the long barrelled infantry rifle (it's still in the family, I think). I bought him a couple of boxes of Hornady ammo for it about 10 years ago. He had it for many, many years, I can remember it being used even when I was a little kid. Factory Norma ammo is pretty much equivalent to .308 ballistically. Neat old rifles, but that one is LONNGGGGGGG. When we were young, one of my cousins was always carrying it during deer season. It did a good job. That one was no carbine, of course.

I can remember seeing ads for them in The American RIfleman back during the '60s, for about a $20 bill, carbines, too. They were always a bargain.

I have owned a model 1891 7.65 Argentine mauser when a teenager. It was in a large barrel at a local large discount dept store in s/w Pa, back in 1965 cost: $17.95 !!! LOL ! Dad knew I wanted to deer hunt and bought it for me. It was cut down already 21" barrel, cut down military stock refinished... not a bad looking 1st rifle for a 17 yr old. I had the bolt bent and re-shaped, the action drilled and tapped, refinished the stock, 16 coats of Lin-speed oil finish, re-blued the barrel, knocked off the military sights, and had the local steel mill machinist who did the work, reload some Norma cases with a good handload, some .311 150 grains spitizers & some .312 174 Speer gr round nose, both shot 1" groups at 100 yds with a Bushnell Banner 1.5x4x28 scope. With the military sight with the front sight built up to bring it in on paper at 100 yds, it shot well at 75 yds maybe a 2 inch group with a military surplus ammo, but with the scope and handloads... it was 1 moa usually. Only killed a large grey fox with it, the 174 gr round nose at 35 yds... put a fist size exit hole in the large grey fox . dropped it in it's tracks. They can be fine shooters with some work. Similar in power to a 300 Savage. Traded it a few years later for a LH Rem Mod 700 BDL 30:06. Oh just remembered... had some issues with the clip not pushing up the 2nd, 3rd 4th shell even after replacing the clip spring with a mod 98 spring, done at Flaig's Gunshop Millvale Pa. My 1st rifle... wish I still owned it even though 15 rifles have replaced it. HH

I got an 1891 Mauser made in 1897 for $100 in 2011.
The girl sold it when her dad died.
It looks like it has never been fired, but the stock got varnished.

I've got a sporterized artillery carbine with the 18" barrel, an older sporter with an original Reinhardt Fajen stock from before the time Potterfield bought the company and ruined it. Someone has done an exceptionally good bluing job, perfectly polished and high gloss. I handload for it, using .311 bullets of at least 150 grains. It does NOT like lightweight bullets! 150 to 180 grain .311's at around 2200 FPS shoot into 1-2" at 100 yards with a 4X Weaver steel tube scope. It drops deer stone cold dead it I do my job behind the scope right. I like the short barrel and light weight, but it does smack me around a little with recoil.
Jerry

The old 1960s Williams book on sporterizing military guns has a real beauty in it. They make up into a lovely rifle, if you don't mind spending the money. The prices listed in that book for various modifications seem like jokes now.

Gil Sengel took a real beater and turned it into a SS .45 acp plinker for a magazine article.

I had 2 of the 1891 carbines, and a 1909 carbine that I'm still kicking myself for selling. The 1891's were pretty cool little rifles. One had been sporterized before I got it, the other was an all numbers matching one still in full military configuration. I shot the first one some, and cannot remember how it shot, so it must not have impressed me.

As cool looking as the 1891's were, the 1909 was a much better rifle, and if I were going to pick one for shooting or hunting, that's how I'd go.