| Schauckis |
| (.300 member) |
| 03/08/07 11:33 PM |
Re: 8x75RS revisited
|
Quote:
The problem here is, however, that there have been extraction problems in the '95 with cases that have no rim, in practice .30-06 and .243. Therefore, the .338-06 is not an any better solution.
I'm curious about this statement. I've never heard of any extraction problems with .30-06 95's {other than typical lack of primary extraction which is common to all 95's and most levers in-general}. Are you sure the problem guns you are referring to weren't modified 7.62x53R ex-Russky guns? I'm not disputing with you here, just curious about your experience.
Frankly, I have not personal experience thereof.
It is my understanding that this was the case specifically with the newer factory-made .30-06s. I have read it from several sources and therefore do not doubt it. Or at least until someone undisputedly proves that there was no problem, I'd be hesitant to take that route.
In my experience, the rebarreld ones have always been made to shoot rimmed ammo and therefore i have not come across this problem specifically (see below)
Quote:
The aluminum actioned BLR's certainly must cure the deadweight problem, but I can only guess what the action would look like after some time in the field. I have never been a fan of aluminum on a gun.
Agree.
Incidentally, the Sako Finnwolf and Winchester m/ '91 (?) were the same, i.e. essentially a bolt used with a lever, and they worked perfectly with rimless ammo, as did the Savage 99.
Quote:
By the way, I wondered if you were from Suomi. Years ago I used to correspond with the late PT Kekkonen and he mentioned the 95 was not only common in Suomi, but also years ago was commonly modified and sporterized for hunting hirvi, and rebarreled after the law change {early 50's if I remember correctly} requiring the 8,2x53R minimum. That's part of the reason I am wondering if the guns with extraction problems you mention were 7.62x53R rifles rebarreled to .30-06. The old {and dangerous} Bannerman Mosin-Nagant conversions {7.62 Russian to .30-06} kept the same extractor, relying on the "throw" of the spring to provide adequate grip on the .30-06 case. This was one of many reasons these conversions were poor and shouldn't be fired.
Why, yes, I am! Nice to hear you have acquainted yourself with our far little country.
Your friend Kekkonen's statement was precisely right: the old Russian Winchesters were rechambered for the 8,2 or 9,3 due to the 1950s law prohibiting the use of a military cartridge for hunting, and also in the 50s requiring for elk (hirvi) hunting a bullet diameter of more than 8mm. Given that some 300,000 rifles were supplied to Russia you understand them still not being in short supply.
But as I said, I have not came across any modified for other than rimmed ammo. Also, to drill the gun up to 8,2x53R was apparently the easiest way as then the chamber is the same: for e.g. the .30-06 the cartridge is longer but the diameter of the case and the base of the case are a lot smaller, so the easiest option then was to just drill the hole bigger.
Today, the old 8,2 is dying away not all gun shops having the ammo and prices going up, and this is part of the reason for my inquiry.
Also, a lot of the Mosin-Nagants or like (the Finnish "Ukko-Pekka") were also commonly modified to take the 8,2, and my uncle used one until recently and in his hunting party there still is one other in use. Also a late friend of mine used his drilled 8,2 until his death, so it certainly gets the job done.
You'll probably not believe this but this summer I shot a three shot group with factory ammo of approx. 40mm @ 100 meters, standing up supporting the rifle against a support pillar. This with open sights! The bloody thing is accurate, powerful and reliable enough not to justify the acquisition of a new rifle - plus me and my father like it so much and we both are very comfortable shooting it. In these days of glassfibre stocks, stainless barrels and scope sights it always draws positive attention and doubtful looks when out hunting. We let the results speak for themselves.