Inital Evaluation of 30-06 Mitchells Tanker Mauser M63

[surveyor47]

The rifle LOOKS GOOD, REAL GOOD.  The wood is well fitted. The blueing is like the old once upon a time S&W blueing. The action is crisp.  It comes to the shoulder like a nice little carbine should.  

I shot 50 rounds through the Mauser yestarday, factory HPX 150 grain militay 30-06 and a standard M1 load, 47.5 grains of IMR4895 and a 147 grain Winchester FMJ. I found that the HPX military rounds fit a bit snug in the chamber, but the reloads required that the bolt be closed with more than the usual amount of force.  My 1903A3 fed both rounds slick as a whistle.  So, I think that this rifle has a bit of a tight chamber.  Small base dies will be necessary for reloading.

With the rear sight placed at its lowest position, the rifle grouped about 10 inches above point of aim at 100 yards. I dont think that switching to 180 grain bullets will lower the point of impact sufficiently.  I think that a taller blank front sight that can be filed down will be necessary in order to get a 100 yard zero.  

The trigger is very very rough and heavy. Despite the smooth trigger surface, I wore through the skin of my trigger finger by the 30th round.  A trigger job will be necessary, but I dont think expensive.  

All in all, I think that this gun has excellent potiential as a Scout Rifle, which is what I had in mind to start with.  I am thinking an XS rear sight and possibly a Trueglow front sight.  Not traditional, but a very effective hunting combination.  The rear sight can be replaced with a base for a quick detachable mounted Scout Scope.

All in all, I think that the rifle has excellent potiential, but requires more work than I anticipated.
 

[Mikey]

Surveyor:  yes, small base dies for that tight chamber.  Also, if the trigger is gritty and rough it can be smoothed out or simply replaced with a Bold Trigger that will work with your current wing safety.

The Mauser inverted 'V' front sight is regulated to about 300m with the rear sight at its lowest setting, which will give you a 10-12" high poi at 100m.  The easiest way to deal with that is to replace the front sight with a Swedish Mauser front sight - the Swedish front sights are square blades, not the inverted 'V's and give you a much better sight picture, and you really cannot tell even by looking that the front sight is different as it slides right into the existing dovetail. 

Actually, from either SAMCO or SARCO you can obtain a Swedish Mauser front sight kit that contains 3 or 4 different front sight blades of different heights and you can just swap them back and forth until you find the one that gives you poi at poa for 100m. 

You can also just open up the rear 'V' sight a hair with a small Swiss file to square the 'V' to match up with the new front sight blade and you will have near a set of match sights for that Mauser.

I really have to laugh a bit at Mitchells - they restore, rehab/make nice rifles but haven't yet figured out how to get the darn things to shoot to poi at 100m.  Maybe they need to talk with the Swedes about this, yah??

[surveyor47]

This gun is a subject that Im very torn on. While I like the factory sights, the sight radius is so short that 100 yard shooting is difficult.  My initial take is that a peep rear sight and a higher front sight would be the fix.  The use of a higher blade would cure the elevation problem and retain the character of the gun.  I found this blank at Brownells:  http://www.brownells.com/.aspx/pid=341/Product/MAUSER_FRONT_SIGHT_BLANK

Still, I believe that the existing sights limit the gun to an effective range of 150 yards, perhaps less. Most deer that I have shot have been at under 50 yards.

The other solution might be to convert it to a Scout Rifle, set up like this, but I really dont like the look, because it take away from the character of the rifle:

http://www.xssights.com/store/scope.html

Mitchells makes a drop in adjustable trigger, but I dont think that ought to be necessary.  I think a good gunsmith ought to be able to smooth up that trigger quite a lot.  Mitchells also makes a Scout mount that fits the gun and sounds like a reasonable proposition.  My preference is a quick detachable mount.

[Mikey]

I've had a few more thoughts on this and if I had the rifle I would just scope it like a sporter, with a cut and welded bolt handle to clear the scope and yada, yada. 

What you have is a brand new Mauser action in 30-06, with a short barrel.  It should be lightweight enough to cart around comfortably in the woods and in either the original 7mm, 8mm or 30-06 caliber your range would extend way beyond the 150 yd mark.   

If you were talking about a pre-war elite guard rifle or one that was brought back from one battle or another then I would say leave it alone and go buy a Mitchells and sporterize that one...... jmtcw.

[surveyor47]

I definately want to be able to use the clip stripper, so a rear mounted scope is out. Plus, I want a good peep sight mounted rear.  That plus the fact that the original front sight is not high enough means that a higher front sight is needed.  The longer sight radius gives me a practical range on game of maybe 200 yards.  Beyond that, I believe that a scope is necessary.

The stickey part is that there is only one place left to mount a scope, forward.  The rear sights are screwed into the barrel and 2 small screws dont seem like adequate securing for a scope mount.  If it was dovetailed, no problem. The problem is how to securely mount a scope mount.  XS sight company shows a Scout Mount where you remove the top handguard and apply fiberglass around the barrel. That would certainly make for a secure mount. Might not be pretty, but it will work. Im just not sure if I want to go to that extreme.

[mannyrock]

  How is the recoil, noise, and muzzleblast?  A .30-06 coming out of a 17.5 inch barrel has got to be, well, horrendus!

[surveyor47]

Actually, the recoil is not bad. This is a pretty stout little rifle, weighing about 7.5 pounds. Lots of wood and blued steell- done the old fashioned way. This guns greatest deficit is the short radius of the military sights, which can be corrected by using a good receiver sight like the XS system sight.  The front sight is too low for the rear, shooting 10 inches high at 100 yards with the elevation ladder set at its lowest point.  Either a higher front sight blank or a higher true glow front sight are needed in any case.  With a litte gunsmithing, this gun will become a real shooter. My intention is a Scout Rifle.

The attraction to this rifle is the full military stock and 30-06 calbiber.  Having destroyed more than 1 sporter while hunting oin mountains and heavy inclines, I have come to appreciate military full length wooden stocks.  Military rifles not be as theoretically accurate as a sporter; but what good does sub-minute accuracy do you when you fall onto the guns barrel and bend it?


If you want to experience ugly recoil, try a Marlin Guide Gun with 405 grain Remingtons with a Marlin Load. Its like going a bout with a prize fighter. My shoulder hurts just thinking about it.

[blackpowderbill]

Survyer, that is why I have always wanted a no1 mk3 with a fine bore. The barrel is wrapped in wood and steel all the way to the muzzle. And they handle nice too.

[surveyor47]

Blackpowderbill,
I had a conversation with a gentleman who builds custom Mausers recently. He told me that he has been building sporterized Mausers for years and has never heard of a case where the gun was destroyed in a fall on a mountain.  I described having destroyed a T/C New Englander in a fall, with not a single part other than the barrel and tang hook undamaged. He took a dim view of my idea of military mausers being an ideal hunting gun for the conditions I hunt under. He said my accuracy was limited to about 3" at 100 yards with a military mauser. OK. Most of my shots are at 25 yards, the furthest at 150 yards. 3" ought to do just fine.  A bent barrel puts the gun out of action.

My track record of bent guns or barrels:
Bent barrel on Remington 870 Lightweight 20 gauge- fell on it in ice and snow.
Totally destroyed T/C New Englander- fell down a 45 degree mountain side in muddy conditions.

The one and only gun I have not managed to destroy (thusfar) under these conditions is a T/C Omega.  Good gun- tough as nails.

[blackpowderbill]

When I was in trade school they really pushed the "one minute or smaller" bit as it relates to rifles. This idea that a rifle that will not shoot inside of one minute just isn't accurate enough for anything but making noise, it's all bunk in my opinion. It's an excuse to sell you something, generally something expensive. My experience has been that a rifle that will stay in three minutes of angle will sufice for most all hunting situations (excepting specialty scenerios like varmints, etc.) I have hunted antalope with a swedish m38 successfuly. They are sort of small and the ranges are a bit longer than I am used to but that GI rifle was up to it. If a rifle will shoot 3MOA, that means at 300 yrds I am inside the ten inch circle that approximates the kill zone of most deer and antalope size game. I won't try to speak for others but I know my limitations and unless I got a good prone possition to shoot from, I got no buisness shooting at game at 300 yrds and thats iffy. I try to keep unsuported shots to 50 yrds and use a support past that. Generally I will pass on a 200 yrd shot unless its (animal) just begging to be shot at.

[surveyor47]

September Update
This has turned out to be a nice little rifle. I have replaced the front sight with a higher blank and am currently filing it down to zero it 2 inches above point of aim at 100 yards, thus a 200 yard zero.  The ladder sighs lowest elevation is 200 yards, so things correspond.  My gunsmith wants to wait until after I complete zeroing it to do a trigger job, so that the gun gets worn in before he works.  So, instead of an elaborate conversion, it will be as issued except for a higher front sight and a trigger job.  My gunsmith says that the steel on the receiver is so hard that he does not want to install a receiver sight.  Use of a Scout Scope will require removal of the rear ladder sight.  This limits the rifle more than I first envisioned.  I had initially intended a conversion to a "Scout Rifle".  I dont know of anyone who does that sort of conversion work. 
Overall, I think that a Savage Scout Rifle would have been a much cheaper and equally servicable rifle. 

[mannyrock]

  What??  Your gunsmith says that the steel is so hard on the receiver that he doesn't want to install a receiver sight???  I have been working with rifles on and off for 40 years, and I have never heard anything so preposterous.   Modern high speed drill bits will go through ANY steel!  He just doesn't want to have to buy the bits.  Gunsmithing work like this is done by competent gunsmiths every day.

  This rifle is screaming for a good receiver sight, just as suggested in the original post.  Get a new gunsmith!  It doesn't matter what HE wants.  What matters is what YOU want.

Mannyrock

[surveyor47]

I think you are right.  My smith installed a higher front sight blank and I am going to see how it shoots with the existing military rear sight.  The plan is to file it down so that point of impact is 1.5 inches high at 100 yards, for a 200 yard zero. Depending upon how the new front sight shoots, it might be best to leave it as is and find a smith to install a good peep rear. 

I looked at the XS sight, but it seems a bit too high.  You would need a front sight a mile high.  I think that this gun needs a good Williams Foolproof Receiver Sight. 

[Brithunter]

Check out e-bay as there are often sights like the Lyman 57SME and Lyman 48 and the Redfields. These are the old steel sights and some are old stock still NIB. I picked up a Redfield 70 WCH and 102 NIB for my re-modeled Enfields and a couple of Lyman 57 SME's. The 57 SME sure looks like it's perfect for a M98 action   I tried it against a P-H 1200 and it fits the contour beautifully. Now just need to get one D&T'd to fit it.

[mannyrock]

Hey Surveyor,

    Any further word on this rifle?  Did you install a peep sight on it?  If so, how does it shoot?

Best, Mannyrock

[surveyor47]

Unfortunately, I havent gotten to shoot the Rifle since I installed the higher front sight. My local gunsmith told me that the receiver steel is so hard that he does not want to attempt peep sight installation, so I am looking for someone to do that.

[Victor3]

 Dunlap, in his book "Gunsmithing" describes a simple way to anneal (soften) a rifle's receiver in a very small area for drilling/tapping. I don't have my copy of the book handy, but it involved a car battery.

 Aside from receiver sights, there's also the Mojo peeps. Love mine on the K-31.

[jlwilliams]

  Thanks for posting the review.  I had not been aware of the Mitchell's "tanker".  Makes me want to get one just to pick it up and give it a hug.  It's as 'cute as a button.'

[parkergunshop]

Drill want penetrate a Mauser Receiver bunk,   

The receiver surface hardness is generally between .005 and .015 thousanths of an inch thick.  The core will generally be much softer in the Rockwell 20-30C range.   I have drilled and tapped dozens of Mausers including the best ones Oberendorf made between 1938-1943,  Z24 Czechs, FN 1924, Polish Radoms, Iranian, Yugo, Mexican, DWM etc without any problem.

On the hard ones you simply use a center drill to start the hole, no annealing is necessary, once you break through the thin surface hardness switch to the proper drill size for the screw to be used.  Actually it is best to start all holes with a center drill.

The Enfields and some of the WWII Springfields are often much harder and I drill and tap them without any problem.  The only military rilfe part too hard to drill so far has been the shear piece on a 1917 Enfield, these have to be annealed since they are so hard.