PDA

View Full Version : I need help to identify this mauser 98


PRW
July 25, 2009, 11:31 PM
I purchased this mauser two days ago. I haven't the slightest idea specifically what mauser it is. It doesn't have the original bolt and have been rebarreled to 270. The barrel is marked 270 cal Floyd E Mc Cune - has anyone heard of him?

Anyway, I'd appreciate someone identifying the marks on the receiver.

Hopefully the pictures will load OK, my first time to try.

Thanks - Phil

PetahW
July 26, 2009, 07:10 AM
While I've never personally heard of Mr.McCune, You have one of the more desireable military Mauser 98 rifle/actions, made into a nice sporter.

It's a Small Ring Mauser 98, and not the usual Large Ring action - gunsmiths like to use them for lightweight rifles.

The Small Ring 98 has all the Large Ring Model 98 safety features/improvements over the earlier (cock-on-closing) small ring Model 92/93/94/95/96, but with their smaller size/weight.

The markings on the RH side of the receiver ring are proof marks; the numbers on the LH ring is the serial number; and the "Kar 98: is the German/Mauser shorthand for Karibiner (Carbine) (Model) 98.

Most Mausers are marked with the date of the manufacture and the manufacturer's code, on the top of the front reveiver ring - currently under/hidden by, the scope mount.

.

James K
July 26, 2009, 12:56 PM
The rifle marked "Kar. 98" is most likely the one called the Kar. 98AZ, used extensively by Germany in the later stages of WWI. After the war, tons of them were sold to Turkey and most of those in the U.S. came from that country. In various upgrades, the Turks removed all the receiver ring markings and replaced them with Turkish markings, so the rifles have come to be called the "small ring Turkish Mauser." (The side rail marking is too deep to grind off without weakening the action, so it was usually left intact.)

As PetahW says, they are light and make fine sporters.

Jim

PRW
July 26, 2009, 05:41 PM
Thanks for identifying the mauser.:)

Is this this action of questionable strength to handle modern high pressure rounds?

The 270 is a high pressure round when loaded to max, is this a problem for this action? Is this going to be a problem? In checking, I find that the headspace is at maximum tolerance.

Seems strange that a heavy barrel would be mounted on a lighter action. The barrel is 22 inche with a straight taper to .68, the stock is the original cut down to minimum weight, the wood having quite nice grain.

Unfortunately, one of the screws holding the scope mount has its screw driver slot stripped and I've not been able to remove the mount.

Thanks again - Phil

James K
July 26, 2009, 09:01 PM
That action is a 98 in all but the size of the receiver ring. While in theory maybe less strong than the large ring 98, it was made for the 8x57JS, a round in the same pressure category as the .270. I wouldn't worry about the strength of the original action, but in lengthening a Mauser magazine to hold .30-'06/.270, some of the lower locking surface is cut away, so I would avoid super hot maximum+ loads in that rifle.

I agree the matchup with a heavy barrel is odd. Most folks use those small ring actions when they want to shave weight in building a light hunting rifle.

Jim

PetahW
July 27, 2009, 07:44 AM
Don't forget: a 'smith built it for their customer, and the customer is always right. ;)

I've run across some mighty "strange" customers - but their money spent the same as the other customer's.

.

James K
July 27, 2009, 07:00 PM
I don't believe the customer is always right. While there is nothing wrong with that conversion, one of the serious problems gunsmiths face is a customer demand for something that is clearly unsafe or at least inadvisable. One of the most common requests is replacing firing pins or whatever to allow old Damascus barrel shotguns to be fired, when the gunsmith knows darned well the parts were removed deliberately to prevent the gun from being fired.

A gunsmith I knew had a form made up by his attorney. It had a space to describe the work to be done, a space saying why the gunsmith advised against it and the reason, and that the customer accepted full and complete responsibility for anything that happened to him or anyone else as a result of ignoring the gunsmith's advice. Very few customers would sign, so the gunsmith got out of making a decision, and perhaps out of being sued for doing the very work that he had been asked to do.

Jim