Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Mausers and Military Rifles Bell & Carlson Mauser stocks?

So, who has experience with them? I'm pretty sure this is the route I'm going to go with my modernized 1912 Steyr in .25-06. I've got a military action with commerical hinged floorplate. I assume I'm going to need the Mark X stock.

Any pictures? Any issues? Opinions? I'd like to hear them.

I have a B&C stock on my Interterms Mark X. IMO,the B&C is a bit heavy if you're wanting a lightweight rifle.

Thanks for the info. How was fit? Did you have to do any skim bedding?

IIRC,it had to be bedded.

Shot this on Saturday...


Then Sunday....

The commercial action version also is relieved for a side safety. I had to fill that little bit for my rifle with the wing-type. The barrel is pretty beefy too, and that took some digging. I bedded the chamber area of the barrel and IIRC, skimmed the action a bit. I painted it with a stone-texture paint. Ain't pretty, but ain't slippery either.

They are heavy, but solid and well made. A Bansner might be lighter, but costs more and might need more fitting.

I've got a 98 of some persuasion that was imported by Fed Ord back in the 80s barreled with a 26" ER Shaw heavy profile sporter Barrel in .280 Rem. with a Leupold VX-3i 3.5-10x40 scope. It wears a B&C Sporter fiber glass Stock that I like. But it's no feather weight. The damn thing will shoot though. Nice and accurate.

I dropped an FN Supreme 9.3x62 into a Medalist in 2000 and took it to Africa in 2002 and killed everything I wanted.

Thanks for all the info guys. I was hoping they weren't super heavy but I think I can manage.

I've put two sporterized military 98 barreled actions in B&C stocks. I think both times I ordered the Mark X style. Both times I used commercial trigger guards with hinged floor plates and both times there were some fit issues to be overcome. There are things you may have to do to allow the barreled action to sit far enough back in the stock and you may have to do mods to the trigger guard assemblies. If you take your time and pay attention to what you see as you're doing it, it should not be a big deal.

They are no longer made, but if you can find one, the best economical Mauser stock is a Butler Creek. Yes, it is injection molded, but it is a good quality. The shape is superb and it will take bedding very well. It is lighter than a B&C. Yeah, Basner is great. I have one on my favorite Mauser, but it is a lot more expensive. You used to could buy a Butler Creek for about a $100.

.I got one for my M96 Swede. About as sexy as a 44 ounce baseball bat. It is so fat in the wrist that my 10 YO granddaughter can't get her fingers to close around it. I needed to do a TON of scraping to get the action into it before bedding. Either that stock was bent to the left or my rifle was bent to the right.

I have two of them,both on FN Mauser actions. They are not light, and have to be bedded. I like the high, straight comb.

I got one a couple years ago for my small ring M96 Swede. It's one of those M96's that were sporterized by Kimber circa 1995. It was the best thing I ever did for that gun. Especially in the accuracy dept.. Mine fit perfectly except I had to relieve some aluminum from the bedding block back by the trigger for clearance on the aftermarket trigger I'm using. My hands are fairly large so there's no problem at the wrist and it's a great improvement over those injection molded plastic Ram-Line stocks that Kimber was using back then. Although I always wondered if a thorough epoxy bedding job would work on one of those Ram-Lines as I'm sure the epoxy would bond great to the plastic. Also have a Bell & Carlson stock on a Weatherby Vanguard and that one also lives up to my expectations.

Medalist - hydro dipped



Heavy, as others have said, but otherwise I have no gripes.

A B&C Medalist equipped FN Mauser 9.3x62 worked just fine in 2002 with the 250 gr original Barnes X.

After some reflection, and using one on a light Howa, if I were choosing one for my Husky, it'd probably be the Bansner. The Husky is a good bit trimmer than the FI 1948 .270, so the lighter stock would be worth paying a bit more.

Nice work there, EdM!

I've had a couple of the older ones over the years. I love the shape for offhand shooting but they're heavy--probably just about right for a 35 Whelen or 9.3x62.


Okie John