pre-1898 Mauser chambered in .308

[RangerJoe]

I have an opportunity to buy a pre-1898 Mauser - probably an 1895 - that is chambered in .308 (is that 7.62x54?) It's probably a WWI veteran.

Since the .308 only was introduced in the 50s, obviously this was rechambered. How does that affect the rifle in terms of value, reliability, sturdiness, etc.?

How are these rifles to shoot? Are they sturdy/trustworthy? The Mauser tells me yes, the 1895 tells me to ask questions.

[mannyrock]

Joe,

   My advice: Don't buy it!

   If it is a 95 Mauser, then it was specifically designed to handle the pressure of a 7mm or 8mm Mauser round, which is in the low to mid 40,000 psi range.

   This rifle has apparently been altered to "7.62," which in all likelihood means the 7.62 NATO.  The 7.62 Nato is a specific military round that generates pressure in the mid 50,000 psi range.

   The .308 Winchester is a hunting cartridge, and is NOT identical to the 7.62 NATO.  Although its external dimensions are virtually identical, it has a much thinner brass case, so that it can hold more powder.  The SAAMI pressure range for the .308 Winchester is 66,000 psi!

  So, you're asking if it is a good idea to buy a rifle, that is more than a hundred years old, that was designed to handle the pressure of a 45,000 psi round, and then fire cartridges in it that are in the 55,000 to 66,000 psi range?  No, its a real bad idea.  Don't waste your money.

   Just because a rifle is a Mauser does not mean that it is strong or safe.  The Model 98 Mausers are, from an engineering viewpoint, the stongest design, but even those were made with a somewhat soft carbon steel (heat treated on the outside to give it a tough skin.)  They were not made with modern nickle steel or chromium steel.

   And, each Mauser 98 must be evaluated on its own merits as well, based on age, condition, and time period of manufacture.

   If you really want a Mauser, and its got to be in 7.62, then save up and buy a used Mark X Mauser (commercial model) in .308, built in the 1960s and 1970s in Europe (Yugoslavia I think) on original mauser equipment. Or, buy one of the newly manufactured 98 Mauser sporters in .308 that our now being distributed.

   If you really want a military model, and could live with a .30-06, then save up and buy one of the Columbian Mausers, which were built I believe by FN in the 1950s.  Even then, you must have the headspace checked before you fire it, and make sure there is no major rust on the receiver.

  Hope this helps.

Regards,

Mannyrock

[sbuff]

Its not the one for sale in the Sportmans Guide is it?

Steve

[wganz]

A new Stevens M200 in .308 goes for about the same price:

http://tinyurl.com/mklu68

Already drilled and tapped for a scope mounts, and has a synthetic stock. You can also use the replacement stocks for the Savage M10 for it.

My suggestion is to go with the Stevens M200, if nothing else just from the safety standpoint.

[RIjake]

I have an opportunity to buy a pre-1898 Mauser - probably an 1895 - that is chambered in .308 (is that 7.62x54?)

No, the 7.62x54 is the Mosin Nagant round with the rimmed cartridge.  The .308 is the 7.62x51.

[coyotejoe]

I believe some Spanish M-95's were rebarreled to 7.62 NATO for the Spanish military back in the fifties and sold here in the eighties. I had one briefly and the Spanish quality is definitely not up to other Mausers. The Spanish also produced ammo loaded light expressly for their CETME assault rifle and I believe the Mausers were intended for the same reduced load.

[RangerJoe]

I didn't know it was the Sportsman's Guide one - it was offered by someone I know. However, having just gotten the very same Sportsman's Guide yesterday, I did see the Mausers for sale, and I would guess that this individual bought first and then asked these same questions later and now wants to unload it on me, or someone else (perhaps "unload it" is a poor turn of phrase here...). What are the odds that someone else would turn up a 1895 Mauser re-chambered to .308 now? The Sportsman's Guide price is way too high anyway!

I was very suspicious about the .308 chambering; I knew that couldn't be original. I don't have any strong or particular interest in Mausers or any rifle for that matter, but I am a military history buff and I have a special interest in historic firearms. I usually tend towards WWII, but anything can catch my eye. I was curious; if someone had said "Sure, it's a great rifle!" I probably would have bought it off him, but I have to admit I was very suspicious of it and once I saw it in the Sportsman's Guide I was pretty sure something was up.

I try to search for my answer before I ask it, but when I searched for "pre-95 mauser" on here, I found a lot of unrelated junkl. After I posted this I did another more general search just for "Mauser" and I found a previous post where someone asked about the Sportsman's Guide Mausers and I found myself wishing I had found it before I posted this, because it answered my question quite clearly!

[iiranger]

I believe the Spanish Mausers were 96 pattern, copies of the 1893 originally adopted in 1892 and put into production in 1893. I don't recall without looking, the differences from the 1895 series. Not much.  #1). They were made into WW II. I think Spain switched to the 98 pattern in 1943. No idea what took so long. So you might be buying a rifle made as recently as many other Mausers. No one rates the products of Spain as as well crafted as German or many other makers. #2). One of the gun magazines did an article, when these re-barrelled guns became available, they had HP White labs test them. HP pronounced them safe... Seems Spain had the good sense to only re barrel late/ recent production guns. Yes there is the .308 NATO CTME load, but they were pronounced "o.k." with factory .308... For a "truck gun" I would have one at the original prices. (Fact I bought two... one with stock, one without. Swede stocks fit fine with little carving...) Todays "gouging..." prices (showing my age, I fear). As said, Savage makes a better purchase "deal." And if you want collector... It would be like collecting "Yugo cars." Oh yes, .308 is 7.62x51mm NATO in metric. There was also a 7.65x53mm Belgian Mauser some of which got converted to .308. Didn't have the price at that time and never handled one... luck

[Brithunter]

The ones that I saw advertised as being .308 were the 1895 Chilean and have heard varying reports to how good or safe this practice was..

Now the Spanish 7.62's were the FR7 and FR8. The FR8's were built as 7.62mm rifles the FR7's were older 7mm's converted and not as good as some suffered lug set back. With all the good used commercial .308's out there why not buy one of those?

If you really want a military Mauser then get either an original 8mm or 7mm unless you can find a good Isreali M98 conversion that is.

[blackpowderbill]

Another point I have noticed is that Spanish Mausers tend to be of rather shaky quality. I have worked upon a number of them and I believe there wasn't a straight and true surface on them. For the money I would much sooner recomend an Ishapore 2A1. They are a well built rifle and will easily take the higher pressures.

[Brithunter]

There is no way I would recomment using an Indian made firearm for anything but looking at (wall hanger). Their quality control is far too haphazard to trust in my opinion. If I came to the range and noticed your shooting an Indian or Pakistani made rifle I want to be as far away as possible, if it's not possible then I'll wait until your finished. I really don't trust their stuff.

As for spanish made firearms well it depends on when it was made. Spain has an excellent reputation for steel unlike the Indians and gunmaking too. Some of their custom made SxS shotguns rival the worlds greatest for fit and quality. Of course their not cheap  . The company of AYA springs to mind  .

Parker-Hale used a lot of Spanish M98 actions to build their rifles on, I believe it was Santa Barbra who made them  but have not been able to confirm this except that they do have "Spain" stamped into the side of the reciever tang. P-H brought them in the white and finished them in house. How much maching P-H did on them I don't know, that's if they did any apart from polishing and blacking. I also recall that the Santa Barbra actions and Mausers were highly thought of in the US.

Now the dubious quality Mausers out of Spain were made as I understand it during the Civil war and  in the aftermath when Spain was in a right ole state. Pakistan and India do have this civil war excuse  they just turn out crappy shoody work as the norm.

Have you noticed that since the Indian company TATA brought Jaguar that their sales have plummeted? this was before the banking crisis. The TATA pick ups with Merc engines ............... well their (the trucks that is) so poorly put together you have trouble giving them away. I saw an advert for three of them only 3 years old from a dealer being sold cheap with NO warrenty. Yep even the official dealers won't back them they're that bad. Which reminds me I have to ask "Paul" ,one of the Firearms Enquiry Officers employed by the Police brought one used because it was cheap, to see if he still has it and if it's still running  .

[blackpowderbill]

I have had and fired a few Ishapore rifles and handled and worked upon alot more. I worked in the firearms trade for over ten years; in that time I have never seen a 2a or 2a1 that self destructed in use. Further I have never seen any reputable reporting of one coming apart due to poor materials or shoddy construction.  I will concede that they do not offer very good gas protection but that is true for the whole Lee Enfield series of designs. In comparing Enfield manufactured No1 Mk3 rifle to Ishapore manufactured Mo1 Mk3 rifles I can find no quantifiable difference in quality of manufacture.
  You may have been thinking of "Kyber Pass" rifles which are crude hand made knock offs utilizing whatever materials where at hand.

[Brithunter]

You may have been thinking of "Kyber Pass" rifles which are crude hand made knock offs utilizing whatever materials where at hand.

Nope, in fact the only Khyber pass rifle that I have seen wa actually better finished than the official armoury production 

I will concede that they do not offer very good gas protection but that is true for the whole Lee Enfield series of designs

Oh dear how wrong can one be  the Lee Enfield's handle gas escape actually very well and it's a good job they do if one is to believe all the case seperations with the 303 British that one reads about on the web and in shooting forums. I only have two rifles of the lee design right now but at one time had 7 of them and handloaded for them all and I have never had a head seperation on a 303 British case in over 20 years of reloading them  . however if the escaped gas handling properties were poor as you suggest then there would be loads of injured shooter or damaged rifles. New Zealalnd did ban the use of 7.62 Nato comverted Lee's in competition there but it was the stupid "competative target shooters" OVERLOADING THE CARTRIDGE TO MAINTAIN SUPERSONIC BULLET SPEEDS AT 1200 YARDS  the charge weights used exceed any listed for the .308 Winchester let alone the 7.62x51 Nato round. The actions didn't let go but stretched and twisted instead. Pity as if they had have let go perhaps these idiots would have learnt ........................... but no they blamed a perfectly good design for their own stupidity 

As for Indian and Pakistani quality let me relate this experience. I was working as an Auto lathe setter in a small family run engineering firm whose products are widely used in the Aviation servicing industry. One crucial part called for the use of an expensive high nickel content stainless steel tubing. In manufacture if the thread grabbed the tap when doing the second end over $20 US of tubing was scrapped so the new buyer brought equivalent steel from India at half the price and it all prooved to be scrap as their quality control was sooooooooooo good the tube was lobed like a cam instead of being round and even after grinding it had valleys so would not seal  . Of course we could have altered the rest of the componants including the special seals to accomodate the shoddy indian stuff but when a one off was tried to doing so it was found that the tensile strength of this "high quality tubing" was so low it buckled in use  .

The striker tip that screws into the tube, well he brought the stainless from the same source and it prooved impossible to form. The shape is turned using special forming tools and well it welded itself to the tools requiring them to be re-ground and it did it again and again depsite even using neat high sulphur cutting oils. This job that was a normal production run should have taken 3 days max but it took over 10 as it wore the tools so badly that new ones had to be made and it welded to them as well so in the end we had to run 4 different turning operations instead of one and grind all the diameters to try and get an acceptable finish. it was then found that they could not be heat treated to the required standard so they ended up being scrap to so his cheap 1/2 price Indian steel ended up putting production back by nearly a month and costing and six times what it should have down.

It's experiences like this which make me laugh at the claims that the Indians used higher quality steel in the production of the 2 and 2A's  . You can shoot them if you wish, it's OK I am at a safe distance  It seems the only way in which they do make anything of aceptable quality is when it's overseen by Westerners. China certainly has nothing to fear from the High quality production from India