7.62 Chileno Mauser

[Calfed]

I'm looking at buying a 1895 Chileno Mauser that is described as being in "7.62". I know that there are conversions of the 95 Chileno Mauser to 7.62 x 51, but I always thought that the rear receiver bridge or the receiver ring had some notation of the new caliber--".30", "7.62", "Nato" or some such.

I can find no notation or indication of the conversion anywhere in the pics.

Information

Warning: This is a relatively older thread This discussion is older than 360 days. Some information contained in it may no longer be current.

[RBruce]

I bought two of them that were rechambered in 7.62 NATO. Not long after, I noticed that one had a crack in the rear bridge. I returned them both. IIRC, they are the 93 model, small ring Mauser. They may not be safe for the pressure of a 7.62 NATO or .308 round.

[Calfed]

This one appears to be the 1895, because it has the auxiliary "locking lug" that the bolt handle fits into.

Was there any notation of the 7.62 rechambering on your rifles?

[Calif-Steve]

I bought a 7.62mm M98 Mauser (Chile Mauser?)at a show a few years back. It has a 2 groove barrel and certainly appears to be a USGI 2 groove 03A3 barrel. Chile went through a huge re-barrel program some years back and I have seen many Mausers rebarreled into 7.62mm. Some were very nicley done and are certainly worth the money. Not too sure about the M1895's, however. I also think at least some have 7.62mm sleeves, as they were not actually rebarreled, but bored out into 7.62mm. These must be avoided.

[Jim K]

Some of those Chilean Mausers were rebarreled to 7.62x51 NATO, but many were not. Instead, the chamber was drilled out and a chamber insert installed. Then the barrel was re-bored and re-rifled to .300/.308" caliber.

Here is a cross-section of a barrel converted that way. Safe? I believe so, at least for limited use, but hardly ideal. Still, it does preserve the original barrel and matching numbers.

Jim

[Calfed]

Thanks.

I'm wondering if there is some marking made at the time of the rechambering, such as "7.62", ".30" or "Nato".

If so, then I'm wondering if the absence of such a mark may indicate that the auction house is wrong about the caliber.

[Calif-Steve]

It may take awhile, but that type of sleeve will work out. Press-fit with no Locktite, it's backing out, for sure. By the way, the 95 Mauser was not designed for that type of pressure generated by the 7.62mm cartridge. The receiver will stretch. But the sleeve will be out by then. The 7mm version is a keeper, no doubt about it.

[Jim K]

I don't know if the chamber insert was put in with Loctite (or other glue) or not. The one's I have seen had nice barrels on the outside, so I am pretty sure no solder was used.

I am not sure the insert would back out, since ultimately the bolt holds it in. But I suspect that if a wide enough gap opened in front of it, and it is not in there solid, it would act like the floating chamber in a .22/.45 conversion unit and back up hard enough to damage the receiver.

I was told that the conversion was done by the Chileans, with the intent of having a war reserve of rifles firing the NATO cartridge. That may be true, and a "quick and dirty" conversion like that could be useful in an emergency even if it was not very durable. (The U.S. issued low-number M1903's in WWII, knowing they could be dangerous, but a man with a gun that might have a problem is better than a man with no gun at all.)

Jim

[Calfed]

Here are the rest of the pics from the auction site. Any opinions on what the lack of any markings indicating rechambering means, if anything?

[Calif-Steve]

7mm Mauser? A real keeper. Looks unissued. Nice.