Can anyone please advise what this is? It is listed as a "Mauser M95 .308" but it doesn't look like any M95's I can locate online. Thanks!
Attachment 110028
Printable View
Can anyone please advise what this is? It is listed as a "Mauser M95 .308" but it doesn't look like any M95's I can locate online. Thanks!
Attachment 110028
I think it's a 1895 Spanish Mauser Carbine. This rifle was originally chambered in 7x57 but was re-barreled/chambered in 7.62 Nato. the front cap is missing though. I'm not sure they're too safe to shoot though,
Thanks!! Are front caps available?Quote:
Originally Posted by browningautorifle
Looks like carbine barreled action in a cut down rifle stock, I dont see where the forend is inletted for a nose cap. Or am I missing something....
Spanish made into that likely by importer.
Now that Browning steered me correct, the gun is as he says and he is correct, it is missing the nose cap with sight protectors ($24 at Liberty Tree). If I can get it for $200-250 I'll take it. It's a little weird and the bolt and receiver don't have matching numbers but it is a military mauser and it is original so I think it might be a nice piece to add to the collection.
There used to be a LOT of these floating around in Australia; I even had one.
Allegedly made from original 7 x 57 carbines. I was given to understand that they were re-bored and re-chambered for the Spanish loading of the 7.62 NATO round as loaded for their CETME rifles. As a result, the bores were VERY nice. So, allegedly not as stiff a load as, say M-80 or Oz L2A2 / F4. I suspect that the engineers were sufficiently switched to extend the freebore a little, to reduce peak pressure, but never bothered to gauge mine when I owned it. Almost as outrageous as the Columbian? FN M-98 carbines: .30-06 and 18" inch barrels! Someone in Bogota had a sens of humour.
Good scrub gun for culling feral pigs, but a bit noisy with the short barrel. (That's why ear protectors were invented). Never had any signs of hard extraction, bolt through the forehead, etc.
If the original metallurgy was as good as proper Mauser spec, (see also Swede M-96) there is no real reason for them to NOT hold up. I've seen Swedish M-96 Mausers in some serious cartridges, like 9.3 x 62 and .308Win, BOTH ex the original factory, sold under the Husqvarna label, so....
Major caveat with a lot of those early military rifles is RUST; not where you can see it, but below the "wood line". Rust pits in the metal near the chamber area can develop into stress risers for cracks if deep enough.
Thanks for the info. Looks like many of these were made in Germany where the metallurgy is very good. If I obtain this one I'll have to check for the original manufacturer. If I do shoot it, I'll use the lightest 7.62x51 rounds I can find. I don't have any safe queens so everything gets used at least once a year (which is always fun!).Quote:
Originally Posted by Bruce_in_Oz
If you load for them you can make it light...or lead bullets.Quote:
Originally Posted by Singer B
In the days when these were being designed and made, the WEAKEST "link" was the ammo.
Note all the attention to designing in "safe" venting of nasty hot gases and brass fragments built into them ALL.
Cartridge failure was NOT an unknown thing, partly because metallurgy was still a relatively new science and "mistakes were made" from time to time. Even as the Mauser 98 was being developed, there was careful consideration given to safely channeling and diverting the nastiness from a failed cartridge case. The Type 38 Arisaka took this to the heights. That is why the striker shroud / safety-catch housings on M-98s and Arisakas are shaped the way they are. Commercially, having "three rings of steel" as your sales pitch, without also having a "plan B" would not be a good thing. Not a lot of risk from factory fodder, but I have seen some spectacular damage caused to modern rifles by hand-loads; either the wrong type / quantity of powder or untrimmed cases playing Hell with bullet retention / pressure curves.
All that attention appeared later on, but many of the earlier designs (earlier Mausers (possibly including the 1893, though I would have to double check), Gewehr 88s, Lebels, etc.) weren't really designed with ammo failure in mind as smokeless was so new, and it wasn't really a problem with black powder rounds. It is interesting what happens in a case failure, I had one with a piece of PPU 7.5x55 brass which I had worked up a GP-90 pressure load for my 1889 Schmidt Rubin. Felt some hot gas come over my face as it is one of those early designs without proper safety considerations, but nothing else negative happened.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bruce_in_Oz