Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Mausers and Military Rifles ID required please.

I know these aren't the best photos, but I don't have the rifle in hand yet.
All I know is that it's a commercial Husqvarna action. It's chambered in 9.3x57 & I know the barrel has been cut. I'm picking it up as a cheap project this weekend. It needs a trigger & I'm trying to research exactly what to look for & order.
Obviously the rear bolt shroud has been switched out at some point for a trigger block safety.

I'd really like to know exactly what it is I'm getting into.

I believe it is a small ring (96) action. Measuring distance between receiver bolts and lack of third lug will confirm that much.

Should make a good rifle with a little TLC.

That's what i thought, but I'm not too familiar. Could you tell me; are there differences between makes, or is a 96 a 96?
I'll actually have it in hand on Saturday afternoon so I'll be able to measure the bolt distance.

Husqvarna never made any small ring 98 military or commercial Mausers prior to the introduction of the HVA 1600 series. Husqvarna commercial Mauser small ring actions prior to the HVA 1600 series were in the 46 and 640 serues, All of the small ring Husqvarnas that I've seen with thumb slots in the left receiver rail have been 46s, as the 640 small rings that I've seen were the "strengthened" versions that didn't have a thumb slot.

The 1894, 1896, and M38 small ring military Mauser actions are, physically, all the same.

Simpson LTD in Galesburg, IL, haa probably been the biggest importer of rifles from Sweden for the past couple of decades. If you look at their site, there is probably a rifle similar to your's.

In addition to the commercial style bolt shroud, I put a Bold or Timney trigger on my SR Swedish builds and also a Dayton-Traister cock-on-openning kit.

The commercial style bolt shroud on your rifle eliminates the major/primary weakness of the pre-1898 style Mauser actions, their small gas shield doesn't do a very good job of protecting the shooter from escaping gas.

Thanks for the replies, very educational.
Would you know if the Bold trigger assemblies are still available? I had one on a .257 Roberts & it was fantastic. I've done some cursory googling & turned nothing up. I'm not a fan of spending Timney money if i can avoid it!

It's a model 46. Chambered in 9,3x57. Essentially, a 96 but some will argue that due to the bent bolt handle it came with, it should be called a 94. Structurally, they are the same. The later Husqvarna crested examples with thumbcuts, while for all intents and purposes a 96, are often said to be M38 derivatives. Nitpicking in my book as they are all mechanically the same as a 96.

I wondered about that. Was there any testing done to confirm this, or incident reports? I was thinking maybe that there may have been an element of being conservative - there are certainly other steps taken / features included to divert gases through the action and magazine.

I have read a claim that Paul Mauser lost an eye when he had a catastrophic case failure while firing a pre-1898 style Mauser rifle and that experience prompted him to improve the gas venting/handling attributes in the 1898 style actions. I have also read that the larger gas shield is more sizzle than steak, not really as effective as it was claimed to be. I've never had a "kaboom" in a pre-1898 style Mauser, my only one coming on a FN built 24/30.

I have reworked over a dozen pre-1898 style Sweds and prefer the late production Husqvarnas. When I have reworked them, I have always made 3 modificatons that weren't necessary, but ones that I felt were worth the cost and effort; installed a commercial style bolt shroud, a Bold or Timney trigger with a trigger block safety, and a Dayton-Traister cock-on-openning kit. I am not claiming that my way is the best way, only that it is my way.

What's the advantage to the cock-on-opening kit?

Neither I nor my Norwegian bachelor farmer friend like cock-on-closing, so whenever I have reworked a Swedish small ring Mauser for him or for myself, I have always made those 3 unnecessary modifications.

Bold triggers have been gone/out of busines for quite a while. Boyds Gunstocks was selling them. They weren't a bad trigger. You might find one on FleaBay or GB.

I'm surely not the gunsmith some of you are. But I see a rifle of unknown modifications in terms of, for instance, exactly what that bolt shroud is - brand - quality, etc. Questions of proper/competent workmanship. The bolt handle conversion and how much heat exposure occurred/whether heat shielding properly managed. I'd not be comfortable. The best gunsmith reviewing the work 'hands on', to perhaps form a fairly competent opinion. But in reviewing work of others... Many unknowns.

Something of a 'clean sheet', as not infreqnently seen, principally just stock alteration; such one matter. As moving here, quite another.

I'm also ever - why in heck change a perfectly good cock on closing action to cock on opening??? The so-called "speed locks", to me far more hype than reality. But 'theory' providing some sense! The early Model 30 Remington rifles assembled principally with Model 1917 components, were with the cock on closing and working well in sporting context from 1921-25.. As 'convenient' Remington modified components and from perhaps 1926 forward 'factory' cock on closing. Factory one matter and aftermarket another. I agree, more a matter of taste. I just don't buy into the rationale beyond 'persona'.

I have more than a few "Bubba Supremes", humor for the genre as pretty well accomplished. A lot of quite decent 'custom work'! Sorry to sound so negative, but I'd never wish to 'buy into' the unknowns I see this rifle 'visuals alone' presenting.

I do wish the best of luck with it! Beyond...
Just my take!
John

Dayton-Traister has made COO kits for pre-1898 style Mausers and Enfield P-14s/1917s for years. I specifically noted that the 3 changes that I always do on pre-1898 Mausers aren't necessary and that they are my way of doing it, surely not the only way. If you like COC, that's cool. I don't like COC, so when I have a rifle with that feature that I'm going to keep or put it together for my Norwegian batchelor farmer friend who doesn't like COC either, I install a D-T COO kit in that rifle.

I googled Paul's eye incident and found this (turns out it was an out of battery discharge while working on a semi-auto design in 1901):

Well, whatever prompted him to change the pre-1898 small ring designs, he did make changes in the 1898 style, including the larger gas shield on the bolt shroud, the auxillary locking lug, and cock on opening instead of cock on closing. I have never claimed to be an expert on the evolution of Mauser bolt actions.

I noticed that forward of the bolt handle the stock has been notched for a receiver mounted peep similar to a Redfield, Lyman, Parker-Hale, Williams ect ect. It also seems that the holes for said sight have been filled with what looks like some type of epoxy. You will probably be able to see them with the bolt removed. If you're considering a reblue that will have to be addressed.

I installed a Timney trigger on my 1900 Carl Gustafs rifle that I've been sportering for about 10 years now. It's definitely a back burner project. I have the COO Speed Locks on my P14, M1917 and the CG. Some definitely work better than others. You need to do a cocking piece buildup modification* on certain rifles when going to the aftermarket trigger systems over an original sear. The aftermarket unit sears are somewhat lower than original sears are.

*Just to clarify, this modification is required when using an aftermarket COO lock system in combination with an aftermarket adjustable trigger system. Sorry if I was initially unclear.

Yes, and it's possible that there may be considerations that are now lost to time.

The 98 also had the shroud lock. I had a 96 Swedish Mauser rotate the shroud at the wrong time - I don't know how I managed that and it only happened once.

Paul also had a hand in the 1904 Verguiero and it lacked any shroud and no gas release slots in the bolt and no hole in the LH receiver. I guess Verguiero didn't think it necessary and it was a different cartridge 6.5 vs 8mm.

I thought that Vergueiro designed that rifle by borrowing attributes from Mauser, Mannlicher, and the 1888 Commission Rifle to create something of a hodgepodge mixed heritage design. I didn't know that Paul Mauser was personally/actively involved in its design.

I understand that the Portuguese initially rejected the Mauser when it came time to move on from the Kropaschek and voted for something with a more familiar action (Mannlicher?). The vote was quickly rejected by the other half of their military when they found out, and wanted the Mauser, so it stalemated and went no further.

Take two of the process Verguiero and Paul got together to develop the best of both worlds - sounds like someone ordered this process to happen so that it dispayed due dilligence. Looks like many of Paul's ideas were rejected, probably due to cost. I would have thought that it would be technically easy to drill a hole in the reciever, slot the underside of the bolt, provide a bolt shroud and delete the easily fouled striker gap arrangement.

I don't know what Verguiero provided at round 1 but looks like he had influence at round 2.

Well i finally got around to tearing it all down.
It is indeed an M46 (thank you) & other than some badly drilled holes & a bit of filler (now filled & removed, blended & polished) is in great condition. For a project base, at any rate.

I do have another question though:
There is a missing screw that threads into the bottom of the rear sight base, through the forend. (See photo)

Can anyone tell me the thread size of this screw, or point me in the direction of where i could possibly find an original? I've searched every possibly parts terminology i can think of & I'm coming up blank.

Anyone?