WW1 Kar98a sporter 220 swift

Hello there, I’m new to the forum so forgive me if I do not ask the right questions. I recently acquired a kar98a small ring barreled action off gunbroker. It is chambered for .220 swift. I’ve got some work to do with the bolt to continue sporterizing it, my question is this, would this rifle be safe to shoot the .220 swift cartridge? I’ve seen on many forums that people have had small ring Mexican mausers chambered for 22-250 and I figured they were similar in pressures. Any help would be greatly appreciated.

I would shoot if the headspace was okay and the gun was otherwise sound. I'm no expert, but I still have all my fingers and both eyes after 35 years of playing with Mausers.

If it is in good condition, I'd echo Theo Gallus' advice.

I have a 256 Newton that was built on a 1917 vintage Erfurt SR 98 and have no problems running maximum loads in it.

I have no problem being the stick in the mud. A 62K PSI in an action that was only marginally safe for a 50 K psi cartridge isn't a good idea in my book. The Kar98a was discontinued by the Germans and no further development of the Small Ring, Large Thread receiver was pursued by them. the Poles continued to "improve" the concept right up until about 1930 but he advent of the Czech zv33 halted further development.

I would limit use of such receivers to cartridges with about 50K psi and which are used primarily during hunting season.

Originally Posted by z1r

I have no problem being the stick in the mud. A 62K PSI in an action that was only marginally safe for a 50 K psi cartridge isn't a good idea in my book. The Kar98a was discontinued by the Germans and no further development of the Small Ring, Large Thread receiver was pursued by them. the Poles continued to "improve" the concept right up until about 1930 but he advent of the Czech zv33 halted further development.

I would limit use of such receivers to cartridges with about 50K psi and which are used primarily during hunting season.

I own one in 8x57 and follow the advice above. The 180 gr BT flies at 2600 fps via CFE223 (50 KPSI) in my custom 20" barreled rifle.

Originally Posted by z1r

I have no problem being the stick in the mud. A 62K PSI in an action that was only marginally safe for a 50 K psi cartridge isn't a good idea in my book. The Kar98a was discontinued by the Germans and no further development of the Small Ring, Large Thread receiver was pursued by them. the Poles continued to "improve" the concept right up until about 1930 but he advent of the Czech zv33 halted further development.

I would limit use of such receivers to cartridges with about 50K psi and which are used primarily during hunting season.

My thoughts too. The only thing that separates them from previous small ring Mausers was its superior escaping gas handling characteristics. Primitive metallurgy for high intensity cartridges? Ok, but I'll stand back here and watch.

Alright thank you for all the information! I’ll try to find some other use for the 220 swift barrel. I have no idea why that barrel would have been put on that action to begin with. While I’m on the subject of that receiver. What would be a good caliber to substitute instead of the 220 swift? I’ve also read that some just put a 8mm mauser Barrel back onto the action. Some have done .257 Roberts, while others have tried 7mm mauser.

7 or 8mm would be nifty. With .257 Roberts someone will come along and feed it a diet of +P loads for sure.

If you're worried about pressure, why not run the 220 Swift and 22-250 or 225 WIN speeds?

Its worth noting that the nominal receiver ring diameter on a Kar98a is within a whisker of that of a 1903 Springfield. 1.300" (Mauser) vs 1.305" (Springfield). The tolerance on that dimension means they are essentially the same. The Mauser has a better breeching design too, with much less casehead exposure. Some may say "oh yes, but what about barrel shank diameter?" but the difference there is small too, and the actual amount of steel surrounding the chamber is the same - save for the unsupported part of the case head on a Springfield. The same applies to a Winchester 54, for which the .220 Swift was developed, though its receiver ring is a tiny bit larger, at a nominal 1.34"

Originally Posted by dan_oz

Its worth noting that the nominal receiver ring diameter on a Kar98a is within a whisker of that of a 1903 Springfield. 1.300" (Mauser) vs 1.305" (Springfield). The tolerance on that dimension means they are essentially the same. The Mauser has a better breeching design too, with much less casehead exposure. Some may say "oh yes, but what about barrel shank diameter?" but the difference there is small too, and the actual amount of steel surrounding the chamber is the same - save for the unsupported part of the case head on a Springfield. The same applies to a Winchester 54, for which the .220 Swift was developed, though its receiver ring is a tiny bit larger, at a nominal 1.34"

The issue itself is not in the receiver diameter or tread size but rather in the threading relief cut in the receiver meant for chip clearance. The same size clearance cut was used on the small ring Kar98a receiver as was used on the large ring Gew98. This proved to leave too little metal and contributed to a tendency of this model to spontaneously become takedown models during WWI. But hey.....

Originally Posted by z1r

Originally Posted by dan_oz

Its worth noting that the nominal receiver ring diameter on a Kar98a is within a whisker of that of a 1903 Springfield. 1.300" (Mauser) vs 1.305" (Springfield). The tolerance on that dimension means they are essentially the same. The Mauser has a better breeching design too, with much less casehead exposure. Some may say "oh yes, but what about barrel shank diameter?" but the difference there is small too, and the actual amount of steel surrounding the chamber is the same - save for the unsupported part of the case head on a Springfield. The same applies to a Winchester 54, for which the .220 Swift was developed, though its receiver ring is a tiny bit larger, at a nominal 1.34"

The issue itself is not in the receiver diameter or tread size but rather in the threading relief cut in the receiver meant for chip clearance. The same size clearance cut was used on the small ring Kar98a receiver as was used on the large ring Gew98. This proved to leave too little metal and contributed to a tendency of this model to spontaneously become takedown models during WWI. But hey.....

But yet the Germans kept them in production and in service throughout the war, and made about 1,500,000 of them. They even stayed in second line service long after the Kar 98 k was adopted, post WWI, and were adopted and produced by the Poles post WWI as well.

Do you have any more information about actual documented failures, in the manner described, during WWI?

Originally Posted by dan_oz

Originally Posted by z1r

Originally Posted by dan_oz

Its worth noting that the nominal receiver ring diameter on a Kar98a is within a whisker of that of a 1903 Springfield. 1.300" (Mauser) vs 1.305" (Springfield). The tolerance on that dimension means they are essentially the same. The Mauser has a better breeching design too, with much less casehead exposure. Some may say "oh yes, but what about barrel shank diameter?" but the difference there is small too, and the actual amount of steel surrounding the chamber is the same - save for the unsupported part of the case head on a Springfield. The same applies to a Winchester 54, for which the .220 Swift was developed, though its receiver ring is a tiny bit larger, at a nominal 1.34"

The issue itself is not in the receiver diameter or tread size but rather in the threading relief cut in the receiver meant for chip clearance. The same size clearance cut was used on the small ring Kar98a receiver as was used on the large ring Gew98. This proved to leave too little metal and contributed to a tendency of this model to spontaneously become takedown models during WWI. But hey.....

But yet the Germans kept them in production and in service throughout the war, and made about 1,500,000 of them. They even stayed in second line service long after the Kar 98 k was adopted, post WWI, and were adopted and produced by the Poles post WWI as well.

Do you have any more information about actual documented failures, in the manner described, during WWI?

Don't read so well, huh. Comparing Polish receivers to German is apples to oranges. Get out your measuring tools and verify for yourself. Nothing I cite will be good enough. Been there, done that. Don't have the time to waste. If you want to build a high pressure round on a Kar98a action, feel free. I valued my customers' safety and built accordingly. You are free to do as you please.

How about a 6.5 Swede loaded to 96 levels?

Originally Posted by Pappy348

How about a 6.5 Swede loaded to 96 levels?

This would be a prudent build.

Originally Posted by z1r

Originally Posted by dan_oz

Originally Posted by z1r

Originally Posted by dan_oz

Its worth noting that the nominal receiver ring diameter on a Kar98a is within a whisker of that of a 1903 Springfield. 1.300" (Mauser) vs 1.305" (Springfield). The tolerance on that dimension means they are essentially the same. The Mauser has a better breeching design too, with much less casehead exposure. Some may say "oh yes, but what about barrel shank diameter?" but the difference there is small too, and the actual amount of steel surrounding the chamber is the same - save for the unsupported part of the case head on a Springfield. The same applies to a Winchester 54, for which the .220 Swift was developed, though its receiver ring is a tiny bit larger, at a nominal 1.34"

The issue itself is not in the receiver diameter or tread size but rather in the threading relief cut in the receiver meant for chip clearance. The same size clearance cut was used on the small ring Kar98a receiver as was used on the large ring Gew98. This proved to leave too little metal and contributed to a tendency of this model to spontaneously become takedown models during WWI. But hey.....

But yet the Germans kept them in production and in service throughout the war, and made about 1,500,000 of them. They even stayed in second line service long after the Kar 98 k was adopted, post WWI, and were adopted and produced by the Poles post WWI as well.

Do you have any more information about actual documented failures, in the manner described, during WWI?

Don't read so well, huh. Comparing Polish receivers to German is apples to oranges. Get out your measuring tools and verify for yourself. Nothing I cite will be good enough. Been there, done that. Don't have the time to waste. If you want to build a high pressure round on a Kar98a action, feel free. I valued my customers' safety and built accordingly. You are free to do as you please.

I think it may be you who doesn't read so well. You claimed "a tendency of this model to spontaneously become takedown models during WWI". That doesn't seem congruent with the facts that the Germans produced large numbers of these rifles, right up to the end of WWI, and indeed switched production over at a couple of their major factories from Gew 98 to Kar 98 as the war progressed, as the Kar 98 (aka 98a) was so popular, not just among the troops for whom it was originally designed, but regular infantry. It also doesn't seem congruent with the service of the rifle continuing well after WWI, nor the fact that Poland adopted them and made them - small ring, large barrel shank and all, off German blueprints and tooling - as well as making large ring actions.

All I asked you was whether you had any more information about the failures you claim occurred during WWI.

Or is it just another of those stories that are oft retold on the internet, like Chinese whispers, for which, when you dig, there is no actual evidence?

I didn’t mean to turn this into right and wrong just needed some information. I ended up removing the barrel and have installed it on my large ring receiver. Everything headspaced correctly and it is ready to go. As for the Kar98a receiver I’m think 6.5x55 or 7mm mauser. I’ll also need to find a small ring scope mount but I think a M96 scope mount might work not sure. Thank you all for your help though!

FWIW, I think you made the right decision. Yes, 1896 scope bases can be used.

Hey another question. This Kar98a action came with the ww1 triggerguard. Now my other triggers will not sit into that triggerguard. Are the triggers made for the kar98k and the gew98 different than the Kar98a?

Originally Posted by Whiteghost109

Hey another question. This Kar98a action came with the ww1 triggerguard. Now my other triggers will not sit into that triggerguard. Are the triggers made for the kar98k and the gew98 different than the Kar98a?

Yes, the triggers are different. A Timney Model 306 will work.

Just because a large number were produced for a certain application doesn’t mean they can be used in any and all applications.
I’ve seen many .308 small ring rebarrels. I own none.

Originally Posted by Whiteghost109

I didn’t mean to turn this into right and wrong just needed some information. I ended up removing the barrel and have installed it on my large ring receiver. Everything headspaced correctly and it is ready to go. As for the Kar98a receiver I’m think 6.5x55 or 7mm mauser. I’ll also need to find a small ring scope mount but I think a M96 scope mount might work not sure. Thank you all for your help though!

Let me know how everything works out on the feeding. I am wanting to do a Swift on a spare 98 I have

The swift worked out well to my actual surprise. I thought I was going to have issues with rimlock but if you stack them correctly they feed with no issues. If I ever figure out how to upload a picture to this site I’ll let you guys see it after it was completed.