- Pre 1898 chilean mauser serial numbers#
- Pre 1898 chilean mauser plus#
- Pre 1898 chilean mauser series#
- Pre 1898 chilean mauser free#
Pre 1898 chilean mauser serial numbers#
Bolt serial numbers mismatched to receiver-typical of early rifles that went back to the Chilean for arsenal re-build. Near excellent overall condition with 98%+ original arsenal blue–except on the butplate.
Pre 1898 chilean mauser free#
As far as safety in the pre-1898 style SR Mausers goes, I think that the replacement of the factory bolt shrouds with commercial style bolt shields with larger gas shields is a worthwhile modifications.A rare Orange Free State (O.V.S.) Boer War contract and Chilean contract Model 1893 DWM full-length 7×57 Mauser rifle. I have converted a couple of dozen Swedish military SR and Husqvarna 640 "strengthened" SR Mausers from COC to COO and can't see that there are any issues there. The change from COC to COO in pre-1898 style SR Mausers wasn't one of them. Was this an issue you brought up with DeHaas? I recall that you convert your SMs to COO.Īctually, I corresponded with DeHaas on multiple rifles. IIRC, it was DeHaas that wrote it was not recommended to convert Mausers with COC to COO because the COC bolt body was not reinforced where the cocking ramp had to be cut. DeHaas isn't the first or only writer to pollute the the pool of information with errors and he certainly won't be the last. I think that DeHaas did a good job, but it is a fact he put incorrect information into the pool and since it was published, it is assumed by many to be correct. I corresponded with DeHaas about some of the errors in his bolt action rifle book and he wrote back, those were the days before email and the internet, telling me that his impressions of several rifles were based on handling and, sometimes, disassembling a single rifle. That is what made the steel from Swedish ores so desirable.įWIW I remember doing some microexamination of some steel fittings from about this period, and there were structures you simply don't see in modern steels, due to the comparatively high levels of phosphorous in that old (non-Swedish) steel. Nowadays we can refine steel and adjust composition pretty readily to get exactly the composition we want, but this wasn't the case 120 years ago. Importantly too, it tends to be very low in impurities or undesirable elements like phosphorous and sulphur.
Pre 1898 chilean mauser plus#
The main ore body has small amounts of manganese, plus a few others like vanadium and molybdenum, all of which have a small beneficial effect on the properties. It was supposed to be the best steel available at the time. It made the steel almost as good as modern chrome moly, from what I've read. The iron ore in Sweden naturally has trace amounts of manganese (I think that's the right metal). When building on military Mauser actions, those built during peacetime, by respected builders, and with quality materials are likely to be better foundations than actions built during the pressure of war-time, or by less respected builders, like Spain.Īs much as I appreciate Frank DeHaas' books, I think that when he didn't have a lot of experience with a particular rifle action, he published assumptions when he didn't know the facts and since those assumptions are in print, they are assumed to be true/correct.
Pre 1898 chilean mauser series#
The Sweds stuck with the same SR action in their 1894/1896/1938 series rifles that were still in production during 1943, so there are a lot of newer, or less aged, Husqvarna-built 1938 style actions to build on than any other pre-1898 style Mauser actions. Many folks who think that the SR Mausers are weaker because of the small diameter receiver ring willfully ignore the fact that the 1903 Springfield shares the same 1.30" diameter receiver ring as the pre-1898 style SR military Mausers. The larger gas shield on the 1898 style military Mausers is the primary improvement, while the auxiliary locking lug is (mostly) superfluous. The "problem" with the pre-1898 style SR military Mausers is that their gas handling designs aren't as good as the 1898 style Mausers. The late Frank deHaas, long-time gunsmith and gun writer mentioned in "Bolt Action Rifles" that these guns were well-built and made of good materials but were likely no stronger than various other pre-'98 Mausers.įor anyone interested and not familiar with deHaas, he goes into great detail examining this action and many more.
0 kommentar(er)
