(.300 member)

07/06/08 03:17 PM

What have we here?

M'Lady, has taken to shooting and hunting. But she eschews the use of a telescopic sight. Has anyone else had a good reason to ponder the lack of decent iron sights on modern rifles?

After looking around a bit we finally found this:

The seller stated that it was a small ring Mauser M98 in 8x57J with double set triggers, iron sights with one standing and one folding leaf, in good condition. Bolt didn't match the rifle, but both have crown over N proof marks. According to the seller, Simpson Ltd. the rifle is part of a lot they imported from Sweden.

Ordered it on Tuesday and my FFL called to come get it on Thursday. Bore is OK, Stock is sound with some "character" that lets you know the rifle wasn't a safe queen. Headspace checked out OK.
After a good cleaning and inspection, we took it to the range with a box of Remington ammo.

It was too hot out to set up a paper target so we just started out shooting some steel plates. I got to shoot it a couple of times, she burned through most of the box. In fact after a few rounds as way of interduction, she was dinging the 8" gong from off hand at 75 yards with no problems.

The only markings on the action are a crown, an N with a crown over it, what appears to be 2,65, and the letters "gr B.P." over St. m. G. on the left side of the action ring. On the right side is the number 187 which is repeated on the barrel.

I believe that the crown over "N" indicates it's proofed for nitro, sometime between 1932 and 1939. The 2,65 gr B.P. is a powder charge and St. M. G. indicates steel jacketed bullets?

At around six pounds empty and with a 22" barrel it's a pretty handy little rifle for her future hunting adventures. I'd appreciate any info you learned Mauser-philes can add.

Administrator

(.450 member)

07/06/08 08:44 PM

Re: What have we here?

Nice rifle. Congratulations.

Don't overlook the fact that you have a .318" bore. If you are shooting .323" bullets in it you will have problems pretty quickly.

Maybe you already knew that, but I just thought I would mention it as precaution.

Curl

(.416 member)

08/06/08 12:42 AM

Re: What have we here?

I wanted to echo that one!
Better slug the bore to be sure, or, I have found that you can get a good measurement with a digital caliper at the muzzle. I know .005 in. doesn't sound like a lot, but it is very detectable when measuring.
If you can, just pick up a box of .318cal shells and see how they shoot - if they are accurate, no need to use the "s" bore ammo anyway.

(.300 member)

08/06/08 02:34 AM

Re: What have we here?

I just slugged the bore and it's somewhere between .323" and .324" so I believe we're good to go with normal .323 bullets.

We are going to South Africa next year for plains game and this is probably the rifle she'll be using (unless she finds something she likes better). When I was there in 04 the longest shot I took was at a warthog at about 100 yds. Everything else was under 50 yards and we'll be hunting the same area next year.

Here she is at full recoil:

Little lady with a little gun.

No pressure signs with the Remington 170gr ammo, but I realize it's loaded down in case someone shoots it in a .318" bore.

I'm thinking that she should use a moderate load with a 185gr to 200gr bullet The biggest animal she's planning on hunting will be Gemsbok.

(.450 member)

08/06/08 03:16 AM

Re: What have we here?

A few things:

First, that is a neat rifle. Looks like what Ludwig Olson calls a "Army Hunting Rifle" that had the bbl lopped to 22".

How about some help from the Mauser experts? Guys, any more details?

Also, I can guarantee you will find that rifle to be a Different Animal when loaded with European full power factory loads or comparable handloads, a totally different species than with the sort-of ".30-30-ish" Remington ammo. For example, the Lapua 200 grain factory load at just under 2,500 fps will let you know for sure when it goes off in a 6 lb rifle with a hard buttplate...

I did some terminal testing a while back on the cheap Remington 185 grain bulk bullet {designed for the 8mm Rem Mag} in the 8x57 and found it to be a deep penetrator and I suspect it would make a very good 100 yard heavy game bullet in the 8x57.

Here are some of the tests of it and some others:

http://forums.gunboards.com/showthread.php?t=1265

http://forums.gunboards.com/showthread.php?t=1254

http://forums.gunboards.com/showthread.php?t=1248

(.375 member)

08/06/08 04:05 AM

Re: What have we here?

being a small ring would disqualify it from being an "army hunting rifle" looks like a military step barrel to me...although it does have some type B overtones better pics could help....paul

(.450 member)

08/06/08 04:47 AM

Re: What have we here?

Quote:

being a small ring would disqualify it from being an "army hunting rifle" looks like a military step barrel to me...although it does have some type B overtones better pics could help....paul

Agreed, but is it a smallring? On my computer it looks to have a step in the receiver indicating it is a largering, regardless of the advertisement.

Without seeing the other side of the receiver I can't tell for sure.

(.333 member)

08/06/08 08:58 AM

Re: What have we here?

Based on the photos and description of the markings, it is similar but definately not a factory Mauser "Army Hunting Rifle Type C". The stock is totally different. Nice looking rifle however.

(.450 member)

08/06/08 09:32 AM

Re: What have we here?

Quote:

Based on the photos and description of the markings, it is similar but definately not a factory Mauser "Army Hunting Rifle Type C". The stock is totally different. Nice looking rifle however.

Dons, yes, it does not have a C stock.

But see page 227 of Olson's book.

The rifle Olson shows looks very much like the one here. He calls it a "Army Hunting Rifle". Is there such a thing? In other words, were rifles made with the stock show here and in Olsons book that were called army hunting rifles but did not have the C stock? Maybe? Or is this a mistake on Olson's part?

Except for the double triggers it looks spot-on to me.

(.333 member)

08/06/08 11:27 AM

Re: What have we here?

Not to discredit Olsen's book, but I tend to rely on Speed's info because it comes from the factory records. Have never seen a Mauser Army Hunting Rifle with set triggers. However, I have learned never to say never. There are so many variables with the Type C as Mauser used whatever they had in inventory to keep the price low. Someone could also have made modifications along the way. The powder charge is the same as the Argentine 7.65x53 military round which was offered in the Type C.

(.300 member)

08/06/08 12:10 PM

Re: What have we here?

Gentlemen,
Thanks for the interest. Here are pictures of the left side:

and a comparison with my byf 38 large ring rifle which I bubba'd into a sporter.

I don't believe I've seen a safety like this one has either.

I worked up some loads today with the Hornady 170gr RN and Varget. Interestingly enough the starting load pretty much matches Remington's factory load. I found a box of Nosler Accubond bullets at a local shop, I imagine full tilt loads will be a bit punchy.
Thanks for the recommendation of the Remington bullets, I'll probably get some and use them as a general purpose load.

(.450 member)

08/06/08 12:30 PM

Re: What have we here?

Yup.

It's a smallring...

Makes it more interesting, yes?

Dons, c'mon...what is this thing...?

I'm stumped.

A guild gun or what? Looks nice, and the stock is exactly like the one listed in Olson...whatever that one is.

I'd say early "transitional" model, except for dates cited.

Could it be a 98A military action used by a non-Oberndorf maker?

Rick, this is a neat gun, and one that deserves to see use in the field. Your Lady is one tough "hombre" if she can stand a steady diet of heavy 8x57 loads in a tanktop!

PS: Rick, does the bolt have a safety lug?

PPS: I grind boltheads flat from time to time, too, but the reason is I'm a lefty and it gives me better purchase of the bolt when working it with a scope mounted.

(.300 member)

08/06/08 01:32 PM

Re: What have we here?

Mr. Fifty7,

She's a tough cookie just for keeping up with me and my BS!

Her other "deer" rifle is a Marlin Guide Gun in .45-70. I'll set this one up in similar fashion, a light load for practice and a moderately heavy load for hunting. It will definitely see the field again.

The bolt looks just like a M98 bolt with the safety lug. The bolt knob has a large flat on the underside and a smaller flat on the top. Both are checkered.

(.333 member)

08/06/08 09:21 PM

Re: What have we here?

If I had to go on the record, I'd say guild made rifle.

(.375 member)

09/06/08 05:02 AM

Re: What have we here?

its a guild look, at the safety

(.300 member)

09/06/08 10:21 AM

Re: What have we here?

Now that we know what it is, what exactly defines a "Guild Rifle"?

I've heard that term before, but never seen a definition.

(.333 member)

09/06/08 11:10 AM

Re: What have we here?

A "Guild Rifle" is one that is custom made for a customer by an individual or small firm belonging to a guild (union) of gunsmiths as opposed to a large manufacturer such as Mauser, J.P.Sauer or C.G.Haenel. Many countries had gunmaking guilds. Maybe others can define it better.

(.300 member)

09/06/08 11:32 AM

Re: What have we here?

Dons,

So it's like a rifle made by one of the modern custom gunsmiths who've got beyond just modifying factory rifles into building their own from scratch or using the best available parts from several sources. An example would be MacMillian, Jarret, or even some of the small manufacturers like Ultralight Arms or Wilson.

Thanks

Rick

(.375 member)

09/06/08 02:10 PM

Re: What have we here?

the term "cigarette mauser" is also used officers that were stationed in germany would trade cigarettes to germans after the war for custom guns like this ,...so the story goes...ive had many of them and they are impressive and they should be some often required more hand work than an oberndorf sporter which basically came of a production line...paul

(.300 member)

14/06/08 06:15 AM

Re: What have we here?

Just as an update, I ordered the Action lace on buttpad for this rifle and made a trip to the range with the Accubonds. The pad only adds 1/2" to the stock and takes all of the Ouch! out of shooting, even with the 200gr loads.

The rifle looks like:

and from 50 yards from the bench it shoots like this:

200gr Accubond bullet pushed by 47.0gr of Varget, lit by a CCI#200 primer.

(as usual remember to never trust data you read on the Internet, specially mine)

I believe this rifle has found a new home.

(.450 member)

14/06/08 10:53 PM

Re: What have we here?

Guys, please have another look at this rifle.

See Speed's Mauser book and Olson, too:

Except for the smallring action and double set triggers, to me the thing looks spot on like the "Spitzer-Bullet" configuration of the Model C as described by both Olson and Speed. See Speed, pages 110-113, especially 112-113.

No "Waffenfabrik Mauser" markings on the receiver is a good indication of a guild gun, but the description by Speed indicates the guns were cobbled together using a variety of parts, some of DWM manufacture also.

Quote from Speed: "Other variations of this model can be encountered, as no standardization of parts was ever practiced".

Is it possible this fellow has a legitimately very rare pre-WW1 "Spitzer-bullet" rifle built on a transitional smallring action, or even possibly a post-WW1 rifle built on a 98a action?

Or am I just plain all wet on this thing?

BTW, Rick R, very nice shooting!!!

(.300 member)

15/06/08 02:24 AM

Re: What have we here?

9,3x57,

It does look a lot like the rifle pictured in the "Spitzer Bullet" ad on page 112 of Speed's book.
Maybe imitation was the sincerest form of flattery in the 1930's too.

Simpson Ltd had a bunch of similar Mauser rifles:

Simpsons Ltd

Someone go and buy what's left before I get myself in trouble...

(.300 member)

16/06/08 12:36 PM

Re: What have we here?

I believe that action is a military small ring Mauser G33/40, I have seem one other rifle very similiar to the one being discussed calibre and all. The only way to confirm that is an original small ring Mauser is to measure the barrel thread diameter which should be smaller in dia. than the large ring Mauser. I believe the G33/40 is a fairly rare action - by the way nice gun and a keeper for sure. --- John S.

(.375 member)

16/06/08 12:57 PM

Re: What have we here?

G33/40,s were not made as small ring mausers, they were large ring only ...paul

(.300 member)

16/06/08 03:23 PM

Re: What have we here?

It is not a G33/40, from the pics it looks to me like a converted KAR small ring 98.
Sorry Pjaln, but you are wrong, the G33/40 is a small ring 98 action.

Administrator

(.450 member)

16/06/08 08:57 PM

Re: What have we here?

This rifle is definitely not a G33/40.

The G33/40 is a small ring Mauser action, but it has the appearance of a large ring action because of a step behind the receiver ring. That's one of the attractions to this action, in my opinion. Here's a photo:

The rifle is definitely on a small ring mauser action, just not a G33/40.

Curl

(.450 member)

16/06/08 10:15 PM

Re: What have we here?

Quote:

It is not a G33/40, from the pics it looks to me like a converted KAR small ring 98.
Sorry Pjaln, but you are wrong, the G33/40 is a small ring 98 action.

Correct.

As I mentioned above, a 98a...but...

Has anybody actually made a close comparison between a KAR 98a and a so-called transitional 98 small ring action?

For example, IIRC, all 98a/KAR actions had manufacturer's stampings on them. This one appears to have a clean receiver ring. From the pix it appears so to me, tho it may be scrubbed.

What are the salient differences between the 98a and transitional actions?

I mean, it is easiest for us to say "It isn't an Original Waffenfabrik Mauser", call it a guild gun or post-War conversion, etc, but according to Speed's Volume 1, and Vol III Archive {just yesterday I was given that one...EXCELLENT book!}, the more we know, the more we don't. Evidently many guns were made up on so-called transitional actions during a wide range of dates. These actions must have laid in storage for years at times and were used up catch-as-catch can.

This has been a very interesting gun to speculate about.

Rick R:

Can we pester you for some pictures of the bolt gas relief holes?

Also, how about a full list of the markings on the gun?

Thanks for posting!

(.300 member)

17/06/08 09:01 AM

Re: What have we here?

Mr. Fiftyseven,

The only markings on the rifle are these:

Left

Right

bottom of the barrel

I notice that I posted the charge it was regulated with as "2,65" and it's actually 2,85.
The camera doesn't have 49 year old eyes.

(.375 member)

17/06/08 11:12 AM

Re: What have we here?

model g33/40barrel shankdiameter.980,reciever ring diameter 1.295,wall thickness left side .085

model 98 1.100 1.420 .150

paul

(.450 member)

17/06/08 12:51 PM

Re: What have we here?

It is common to hear of the 33/40 called a "smallring". The weakness of such terms is that they are generic and are both right and wrong. It IS a smallring of sorts, but it isn't in the sense of the smoothsided Mauser 94, 95, 96 and transitional models.

OK, so it lacks the BUGN proof, but per Speed, has the Crown/N indicating nitro proof years 33-39, export model. StmG indicates a full metal jacket bullet type. As for the serial number, doesn't it fit in the range and placement of transitional models?

Speed says parts were known to lay around for years before being assembled.

So...?

Rick R, can we bother you to shoot a couple pics of the bolt, specifically the gas vent holes?

(.300 member)

17/06/08 02:05 PM

Re: What have we here?

Sorry, you did ask for an order of bolt pix to go with that.

Hope these help.

Rick

(.450 member)

17/06/08 02:34 PM

Re: What have we here?

OK gents...

Large oval gas relief holes says regular 98 {technical term

} to me.

Thanks Rick!

This has been a very interesting post. Hopefully the markings and bolt will be enough for somebody to give us a full description of what you have there!

(.300 member)

25/06/08 01:06 AM

Re: What have we here?

The style of the powder charge/bullet type mark is what was used between 1892 and 1912. After 1912 it became

St.m.G.
-------
13 gr.

That is, bullet type over bullet weight, no mention anymore of powder at all. It's also not usual to see just crown-over-N (nitro proof), there should also be crown-over-U (final inspection) and crown-over-G (rifled barrel).

Looks like a very nice "mom-'n-pop shop" German sporter, and it appears to shoot really well - congrats!

(.300 member)

25/06/08 12:38 PM

Re: What have we here?

Steve,

Thanks, I had read that the crown over N didn't go into effect till after the early 1930's but hadn't found the info about the change from load data to bullet weight.

I wonder if it took a while for the older gun builders to make the change from one style to the other.

If you gents are bored with the Mauser we can try to figure out where my SMLE has been.

NitroExpress.com

Powered by UBB.threads™ 6.5.5

Home | Ezine | Forums | Links | Contact

Copyright 2003 to 2011 - all rights reserved