Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Rifles light weight mausers?

that would be a first

I've got a custom 98 Mauser that goes 7 lbs., 4 ozs. empty, w/o sling. It wears a 24 inch, Pac-Nor #1 barrel (.600 muzzle ) w/ the shank reduced to a minimum. The action has been lightend, but it wears a steel Remington FP & TG, and a M70, two position safety. Steel Leupold QD bases and rings, and a Leupold FX3, 6X42.
The stock is an MPI Kevlar with a 1/2 inch rubber recoil pad and three Micheal's Flush Cups for a CW Sling.
I could probably go to Talley LtWt mounts, and a lighter scope and get it down to 6 3/4's to 7 lbs.
No, it is not a small ring or G33/40 action. E

And it's an ugly POS.

That's the best thing about it.

do you have any pictures of the action?

thanks

I have an old Santa Barbara commercial 98 wearing a 6mm rem tube and a nondescript stock that needs to become a lightweight 7x57 or Bob in a lightweight synthetic stock. I had been wondering how light I could go with a blind mag, FW contour 22 inch barrel, Talleys and a light scope. Is seven doable?

Weigh up all the parts sans stock and bottom metal. Add 2-3oz ounces for the (bottomless) mag box and alloy triggerguard.

Seven minus your total tells you what the finished stock has to go and now all you have to do is find one.

IME, FWIW, stockmakers tend to be a bit optimistic on their lightweight models....

that will work....d'uh

SteveNO;
Steve, regarding the goal of a 7lb Mauser, I'd think it should be feasible if a few conditions were met.

As you can see in the 2nd and 3rd photo I put up, the bottom metal that I weighed went 8oz and 8.3oz respectively, so one should be able to cut 4oz off with a blind magazine.

The sticky wicket will be finding a gunsmith who knows what he's doing with the conversion. From the Mausers I've worked on, I've found that the relationship between the magazine fit and the bottom of the receiver can be critical in making it feed properly.

I'd think that a controlled feed rifle with no floorplate that didn't feed would be nettlesome at best.

Other than that, I'd think it should be possible seeing as I hit 7lbs 3.7oz with steel bottom metal doing pretty much what you've specified.

Hopefully that was some use to you Steve. All the best to you and yours and good luck on your project whichever way you decide to go.

Regards,
Dwayne

FWIW, for the blind mag, I cut the mag box off the bottom metal and swiss cheesed it. Then sent it to the stocker to mold into the magazine area. As long as the follower doesn't hang up on the holes and the stocker follows thru, you are good to go.

Browning(FN)had a lightweight aluminum bottom metal for some of their Highpowers that was a full 4oz lighter than the steel ones. I have a couple. I tried to get a third to cut up for a mag box but no luck. Also have the heavy alloy one that you showed, BC.

well i have all my parts as of today. cant wait to put to get it put together

thanks, Dwayne....I'll probably get Mickey to do it when I finally get around to it.

that is how I did it on a friends 98. I cut off the steel box but rather than swiss-cheese it, I put it on a belt sander and thinned the rather thick walls.

As pointed out previously, the relationship of the box to the receiver is critical. What I did was bed the barreled action first, then I use 5-minute epoxy to fasten the box to the reciever where it was supposed to sit, using some shim material so the box sat 1/32 off the receiver (it's not supposed to touch tightly). Then I degreased the mag box and used bedding compound around it and assembeld the rifle. The 5-minute epoxy breaks away and you clean it up and have the box permanetly in perfect position.

free miner & tomk:
Thank you both for the very thorough explanations, that was indeed good information.

I've got a VZ24 action that was slated to be something or other someday and I just might have to try what you've described. I've never converted a Mauser to a blind magazine yet and it sounds like a challenge I'd like to tackle.

Thanks again, I appreciate you both taking the time.

Regards,
Dwayne

Just a quick note on small ring vs. large ring Mausers - there really isn't that much of a weight savings. I have a copy of the Sports Afield Gun Annual 1970 edition where arms editor Pete Brown measured, photographed and weighed the receivers, bolts and trigger guards/mag boxes of different 45 bolt actions.

Two large ring Mauser receivers and triggers weighed 17.7 oz. A Mexican Mauser receiver (small ring designed for the 7x57, and 1/4" shorter than a standard 98 action) weighed 16.5 oz, a difference of less than 1 1/2 oz. The bolts weighed about 16 oz and the trigger guard/mag box about 10-11 oz, for a total action weight of around 44 oz. For some reason the Mexican Mauser trigger guard/mag box weighed a bit more than either of the two standard length Mauser actions, so overall it wound up weighing only 0.5-1 oz less than the standard Mausers.

The lightest standard length actions listed in that report were the Remington 700, Husqvarna and Savage 110 at 39-40 oz, with the weight savings primarily due to the lighter weight aluminum alloy trigger guard/mag box.

In fact, with the exception of some receivers that weighed more than the average (e.g. the Champlin), most of the standard length action receivers weighed between 16 and 19 oz, and the bolts around 14-16 oz. The steel guard/mag boxes all weighed about 9-11 oz, with the alloy ones 6-7 oz.

So for a lightweight Mauser I would say that the difference between small ring and large ring is relatively negligible, and the big weight savings is using either an aluminum alloy trigger guard/mag box or a blind mag.

This does not address stock or barrel weight which are the other major parts of the equation.

Here's one that I sold to a fellow up here this past fall. He wanted a sheep rifle that weighed less than 7 pounds all up, with five rounds in the magazine....



My old Husqvarna 30-06 with 4X Denver Redfield in Weaver mounts and sling included.

He is very happy,
Ted

Very nice

The small ring v33 and the g33/40 actions are approx 40oz like the Husky--4oz lighter than a large ring 98. Gained from the smaller diameter ring and the lightening cuts along the receiver.

Free Miner--the belt sander is a better application--wish I had done mine that way.

tomk,

Thanks for the info. I've never laid eyes on a V33 or G33/40 so I accept what you say. But the small ring Husqvarna that Pete Brown measured had a receiver/trigger that weighed 17.4 oz, almost the same as a standard M98 Mauser at 17.7 oz. The difference in the Husqvarna was the trigger guard/mag box weighed 7 oz, vs 10-11 oz for the Mauser. I actually think that a small ring saves 2-3 oz overall, rather than the 0.5-1.5 oz measured difference, because that measurement leaves out the smaller diameter of the barrel thread for the small ring action, so the barrel that is screwed into a small ring action saves an additional oz or so compared to an otherwise identical barrel screwed into a large ring.

Now, the Husqvarna had the solid left receiver wall w/o the thumb notch which is probably a good fraction of an oz, and the V33 and G33/40 have the lightening cuts below the stock line, as well as the cuts at the rear next to the trigger and the thinning of the left receiver wall as well. Whether that accounts for 4 oz of steel I'm not sure. Of course, doing all that on a large ring action costs some money. If nothing else I think the best bang for the buck for lightening is getting an alloy trigger guard/mag box from Brownells for around $80 - that is, assuming you can live with aluminum.

You could start with one of these:

http://www.satterleearms.com/intermediate.htm