The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > The Hide > The Art of the Rifle: Bolt, Lever, and Pump Action

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old July 19, 2012, 06:57 PM   #1
redma3
Junior Member
 
Join Date: July 19, 2012
Location: back woods PA
Posts: 2
m 1916 win 308

I have a spanish m1916 win 308 . Can any one tell me for sure shooting modern 308 rounds is bad idea. I've read a lot of do and donts about it... I read one persons comment about it hurting bolt and it not cycling rite. Mine has a slite catch to it.. Any info would be greatly appretiated

Last edited by redma3; July 19, 2012 at 07:35 PM. Reason: more deatail
redma3 is offline  
Old July 19, 2012, 10:25 PM   #2
Mr. Whimsy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 9, 2010
Posts: 147
I have one and haven't shot it much, so I am not the greatest authority and hopefully someone else will chime in.

But... I've concluded - and this is for myself mind you, YMMV - that the 1916 can handle normal .308 ammo. I've read about this on and off for years but I've never seen even one actual account of anyone damaging his rifle from doing it.

It's Internet fear-mongering at its finest.

It's been a while since I looked at this so hopefully someone will come in here with pics of his blown-up Mauser.
Mr. Whimsy is offline  
Old July 19, 2012, 10:50 PM   #3
gyvel
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 30, 2009
Location: Northern AZ
Posts: 5,229
I think the general gist of the matter is that those guns were originally intended for a round that produced about 40-42000 psi or so, and NOT the .308 which is in excess of 50-52000 psi. As I understand it (in other words, "I heard") that the Spanish loading for the 7.62 round was considerably lower than the NATO standard due to the CETME rifles not being able to withstand a steady diet of NATO 7.62.

While I doubt that one of them would actually "blow up," I am of the opinion that excess headspace will develop within a relatively short period of time due to the receivers stretching because of the more or less softer metal used in their construction.

Those Mausers were generally intended to be second line weapons, issued to rear echelon personnel such as police, etc., who would NOT put a lot of rounds through them during the life of the weapon.

YMMV
gyvel is offline  
Old July 20, 2012, 01:09 PM   #4
Mr. Whimsy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 9, 2010
Posts: 147
I am not arguing with you, but will add that I tried to to drill my receiver for scope mounting. Tried. That thing is pretty tough. Come to think of it I've never heard of any "weak" Mauser steel outside of the 1916.

I don't really know what caliber this gun started out as or the pressures it was rated for.

Best solution of all is to just download your .308's and shoot that. If no problems arise, increase incrementally. That is my plan when and if I ever get this thing scoped. It's been sitting around here for 20 years waiting for that day.
Mr. Whimsy is offline  
Old July 20, 2012, 01:38 PM   #5
emcon5
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 10, 1999
Location: High Desert NV
Posts: 1,632
Quote:
I don't really know what caliber this gun started out as or the pressures it was rated for.
1916s are shortened version of the 1893 small ring actions, designed for 7mm Mauser.

7mm Mauser Maximum pressure 56,565 psi (SAAMI spec is lower than this)
7.62×51mm NATO Maximum pressure 60,200 psi
308 Winchester Maximum pressure 62,000 psi

Personally, I wouldn't fire commercial .308. I would handload down.
emcon5 is offline  
Old July 20, 2012, 02:25 PM   #6
PetahW
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 19, 2008
Posts: 4,679
Quote:
Originally Posted by redma3
I have a spanish m1916 win 308 . Can any one tell me for sure shooting modern 308 rounds is bad idea.
It's a bad idea, for sure. .

.
PetahW is offline  
Old July 20, 2012, 03:11 PM   #7
Scorch
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 13, 2006
Location: Washington state
Posts: 11,476
While these rifles may be marketed and sold as 308, but they were indeed chambered for 7.62X51 NATO, and its lower pressures. They were intended as reserve weapons and not as first-line weapons, and as such the concern for their strength and viability in high-volume shooting was not a consideration.

BTW, few if any of these rifles are 100+ years old as is often heard, most of the older rifles were scrapped after the Spanish Civil War, so the dates typically seen on these rifles is from the 1930s on.

I have had several 1916s over the years, 7X57 and never 7.62X51, and fired 7X57 military ammo in them with no negative effects. I have also heard of some that were so soft that they would be unsafe with even 7X57 ammo. If you feel a need for a M1916 as a cheap shooter, definitely be nice to it.
__________________
Never try to educate someone who resists knowledge at all costs.
But what do I know?
Summit Arms Services
Taylor Machine
Scorch is offline  
Old July 20, 2012, 10:21 PM   #8
Mobuck
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 2, 2010
Posts: 2,287
I have 4 of these 1916 modified Mausers. One is still in the 7.62x51 chambering but 2 others have been rebarrelled. Since I can load any pressure level I wish, I keep the 7.62 at 300 Savage performance levels. Another of these is short chambered in 243Win and will never be fired with factory ammo since the bolt won't close on a standard 243 case.
I still have one in 7x57 and an action waiting to be barrelled to 6.5x55.
Be advised that the modification process involved cutting back the front receiver ring so not only is there a strength issue, there is also the issue of one less thread than a true 1893 Mauser. There are reports of the locking lug recesses being set back resulting in extreme hard bolt lift even with moderate pressures. The softer action will deform rather than grenade if over stressed(probably).
Mobuck is offline  
Old July 22, 2012, 09:10 AM   #9
gyvel
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 30, 2009
Location: Northern AZ
Posts: 5,229
Quote:
The softer action will deform rather than grenade if over stressed(probably).
Exactly. Setback will occur with the resultant excess headspace. This will generally result in a case head separation or similar, rather than the action "blowing up."

I've not heard of any of the .308 Mausers "blowing up," or any Carcano either, for that matter, despite what misinformation was promulgated by gun writers.
gyvel is offline  
Old July 22, 2012, 05:06 PM   #10
Mr. Whimsy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 9, 2010
Posts: 147
Not the OP, but thank you Emcon5 and other posters!

There are some tremendously knowledgeable fellows here.

After reading this, I will refrain from loading mine higher than .300 Savage velocities. Honestly that is enough .30 rifle for me anyway, so it's no sacrifice.
Mr. Whimsy is offline  
Old July 23, 2012, 08:44 AM   #11
gyvel
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 30, 2009
Location: Northern AZ
Posts: 5,229
Quote:
After reading this, I will refrain from loading mine higher than .300 Savage velocities. Honestly that is enough .30 rifle for me anyway, so it's no sacrifice.
Actually, a '93 or '95 action would be the perfect candidate for a rebarrel to .300 Savage. I alwyas did like that cartridge, and I am fortunate to have a Savage 99 and Remington 81 chambered for it.
gyvel is offline  
Old July 24, 2012, 10:58 PM   #12
jackpine
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 24, 2010
Posts: 350
no matter what it says on the rifle it is chambered in 7.62 nato and 7.62X51 nato is lower pressure than 308 winchester. Stick to surplus 7.62X51, low recoil 308 win or hand loads.
jackpine is offline  
Old July 25, 2012, 09:00 AM   #13
emcon5
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 10, 1999
Location: High Desert NV
Posts: 1,632
Quote:
7.62X51 nato is lower pressure than 308 winchester.
Right, but as I mentioned above, it is still ~7% higher pressure than the round the action was designed for.
emcon5 is offline  
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:29 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2014 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Contact Us
Page generated in 0.09035 seconds with 7 queries