Jump to content


Photo

8mm Mauser Barrels


  • Please log in to reply
27 replies to this topic

#1 Desert Rat

Desert Rat
  • Members
  • 13 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Las Vegas NV
  • Interests:Off Road Wheeling / Firearms /Video and Photography/ PC-Technology

Posted 26 September 2008 - 12:25 AM

Hey All
I'm back to playing with my Yugo M48. I'm going to visit a smith in the morning and see what options he might be able to offer me as far as what barrels there are available in (7.92mm) Mauser. My rifle had the front sight cut off and re crowned for a ATI stock i tried, after that failed i mounted a B-square scout mount with a 2x20. that worked for a few years. now I'm back to either installing a replacement military barrel or a aftermarket barrel and drill tap for traditional scope mount. my questions are

#1 what commercial barrels are available in 8mm Mauser
#2 (if i reinstall a military barrel) has anyone have experience with accumount scope mounts (Steel long side Mounts)

http://accumounts.com/

picture of my last setup


Attached File  DSC02493.JPG   110.57K   204 downloads



#2 Spiris

Spiris
  • Members
  • 598 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:North Carolina

Posted 26 September 2008 - 10:02 AM

Not accurate enough with the old barrel? I'm sure you are aware that you can get good original or German k98 take-off barrels to replace the old one. You can also go mild to wild in cost for aftermarket military contour barrels. That's your call. A good place to look is www.sporterexpress.com. Maybe someone here has something that you can use. Good old rifle, good luck.

http://www.sporterexpress.com/

Spiris

#3 Desert Rat

Desert Rat
  • Members
  • 13 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Las Vegas NV
  • Interests:Off Road Wheeling / Firearms /Video and Photography/ PC-Technology

Posted 26 September 2008 - 09:22 PM

QUOTE (Spiris @ Sep 26 2008, 09:02 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Not accurate enough with the old barrel? I'm sure you are aware that you can get good original or German k98 take-off barrels to replace the old one. You can also go mild to wild in cost for aftermarket military contour barrels. That's your call. A good place to look is www.sporterexpress.com. Maybe someone here has something that you can use. Good old rifle, good luck.

http://www.sporterexpress.com/

Spiris

Thanks for the response Spiris
Yes my old barrel is in good shape, my concern there was that it wouldnt look right in a after market stock with the front sights still mounted up, the gun smith
informed me today they are silver soldered in place and removed them. along with a drill/tap for scope and forged my bolt.
Yes i have a few barrels or take offs for my mausers, but i didnt find many hits on 8mm mauser barrels other than military take offs. I learned today that he can make me any contour i want.




#4 z1r

z1r
  • Members
  • 2,461 posts
  • Location:Denver, CO.
  • Interests:Guns, hunting, fishing, hiking, camping, good beer and things that make people think.

Posted 26 September 2008 - 10:09 PM

The Yugo Mausers tend to have very good barrels on them and are some of the best candidates to keep in 8x57 and sporterize.

Here is one I did using the issue barrel:



Sorry to all those who have already seen this one a million times, lol. But, it shows how well these rifles can shoot, even with open sights. And, it also shows how the issue barrel can be reworked to a more pleasing profile.



8mm barrels are not that hard to come by. If you are looking for pre-chambered barrels then they are as are people with the proper reamer. If however, you are willing to start from a blank then there are numerous makers.

#5 Desert Rat

Desert Rat
  • Members
  • 13 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Las Vegas NV
  • Interests:Off Road Wheeling / Firearms /Video and Photography/ PC-Technology

Posted 26 September 2008 - 11:33 PM

QUOTE (z1r @ Sep 26 2008, 09:09 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
The Yugo Mausers tend to have very good barrels on them and are some of the best candidates to keep in 8x57 and sporterize.

Here is one I did using the issue barrel:



Sorry to all those who have already seen this one a million times, lol. But, it shows how well these rifles can shoot, even with open sights. And, it also shows how the issue barrel can be reworked to a more pleasing profile.



8mm barrels are not that hard to come by. If you are looking for pre-chambered barrels then they are as are people with the proper reamer. If however, you are willing to start from a blank then there are numerous makers.

Very Nice, I think i am going to go with that style stock as well maybe in pepper. Until today i didnt know i had the option of starting from a blank. after talking to the smith and you guys i know better.
I have a few Mauser's (2) m24/47 (3) M48 (3) FR8 (1) VZ24 (1) 98/22 i have allowed myself to sporterize one M48 and MolyCoat and stain/seal One of the FR8's that the parkerizing and stock was in sad condition. the remaining rifles i just maintain.



#6 bilurey

bilurey
  • Members
  • 124 posts

Posted 30 September 2008 - 03:50 PM

When the Yugos chose FN to set up a national M98 system rifle they selected two peculiar features. First, an intermediate length action with pre-98 action screw spacing. This may have been done to minimize retooling of jigs and fixtures used in existing M1895 Mannlichter manufacture.

Second, a "Safety Breech" which moves the rear face of the barrel into the hole in the Reinforcing Ring inside the front reveiver ring such that the face of the bolt and the rear face of the barrel almost touch - gives maximum enclosure of the base of the cartridge case in case of a case head separtation.

This evolved from problems with early smokeless powder when deterent coatings would not adhere securely to the flakes. This resulted in rifle size powder loads turning into Bullseye pistol powder which in turn converted should held long guns into shoulder held hand grenades. Yet this problem had been resolved 20 years earlier when Centralite proved to be a successful deterent coating.

In addition, the Safety Breeching requires first machining the barrel to proper headspace then removing it to machine a groove in the right face of the breech to allow room for the extractor which extends beyong the face of the bolt. Then, reinstalling the barrel. Rebarreling a Yugo 24 series action can be a very expensive proposition.

Considering the relative scarcity of spare parts for Yugo 24 variations, the extra expense to rebarrel, and the limited variety of aftermarket stocks it's generally better to use them as-is - which is plenty good to begin with. Bill.


#7 bilurey

bilurey
  • Members
  • 124 posts

Posted 30 September 2008 - 03:52 PM

When the Yugos chose FN to set up a national M98 system rifle they selected to peculiar features. First, an intermediated length action with pre-98 action screw spacing. This may have been to minimize retooling of jigs and fixtures used for M1995 Mannlichters.

Second, a "Safety Breech" which moves the rear face of the barrel into the hole in the Reinforcing Ring inside the front reveiver ring such that the face of the bolt and the rear face of the barrel almost touch - gives maximum enclosure of the base of the cartridge case in case of a case head separtation.

This evolved from problems with early smokeless powder when deterent coatings would not adhere securely to the flakes. This resulted in rifle size powder loads turning into Bullseye pistol powder which in turn converted should held long guns into shoulder held hand grenades. Yet this problem had been resolved 20 years earlier when Centralite proved to be a successful deterent coating.

In addition, the Safety Breeching requires first machining the barrel to proper headspace then removing it to cut a groove in the right face of the breech to allow room for the extractor which extends beyong the face of the bolt. Then, reinstalling the barrel. Rebarreling a Yugo 24 series action can be a very expensive proposition.

Considering the relative scarcity of spare parts for for Yugo 24 variations, the extra expense to rebarrel, and the limited variety of aftermarket stocks it's generally better to use them as-is - which is plenty good to begin with. Bill.


#8 bilurey

bilurey
  • Members
  • 124 posts

Posted 30 September 2008 - 03:58 PM

When the Yugos chose FN to set up a national M98 system rifle they selected two peculiar features. First, an intermediate length action with pre-98 action screw spacing. This may have been to minimize retooling of jigs and fixtures used for existing M1995 Mannlichter manufacture.

Second, a "Safety Breech" which moves the rear face of the barrel into the hole in the Reinforcing Ring inside the front reveiver ring such that the face of the bolt and the rear face of the barrel almost touch - gives maximum enclosure of the base of the cartridge case in case of a case head separtation.

This evolved from problems with early smokeless powder when deterent coatings would not adhere securely to the flakes. This resulted in rifle size powder loads turning into Bullseye pistol powder which in turn converted should held long guns into shoulder held hand grenades. Yet this problem had been resolved 20 years earlier when Centralite proved to be a successful deterent coating.

In addition, the Safety Breeching requires first machining the barrel to proper headspace then removing it to cut a groove in the right face of the breech to allow room for the extractor which extends beyong the face of the bolt. Then, reinstalling the barrel. Rebarreling a Yugo 24 series action can be a very expensive proposition.

Considering the relative scarcity of spare parts for for Yugo 24 variations, the extra expense to rebarrel, and the limited variety of aftermarket stocks it's generally better to use them as-is - which is plenty good to begin with. Bill.


#9 plumbum

plumbum
  • Members
  • 222 posts
  • Location:so cal

Posted 30 September 2008 - 04:55 PM

you can say that again. again. laugh.gif

#10 Desert Rat

Desert Rat
  • Members
  • 13 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Las Vegas NV
  • Interests:Off Road Wheeling / Firearms /Video and Photography/ PC-Technology

Posted 30 September 2008 - 10:51 PM

Thanks for the History bilurey, that information gives truth or reason behind why manufactures make the decisions that they do.
As far as re-barreling i decided to just use what i have, i didn't get into the pricing with my smith but i am sure it wouldn't be cheap proposition.
When i picked up my action i found that the stock had been notched for the bolt, so i was committed to using this stock for a this bolt. so with that in mind i cut sanded stained and sealed my old stock. it didnt look to bad. so i will hold off on a boyds for now, The only thing remaining is to aluma hyde paint action and barrel, 40mm or 50mm scope then some rings.


#11 Spiris

Spiris
  • Members
  • 598 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:North Carolina

Posted 01 October 2008 - 07:32 AM

Looking good Desert Rat. I bet you would like to get rid of that steel butt plate though. The 8MM can get your attention after a few full power loads without a recoil pad of some sort. Happy shooting! smile.gif

Spiris

#12 bcp477

bcp477
  • Members
  • 25 posts

Posted 17 October 2008 - 01:42 PM

The choice of intermediate action length plus large-ring size was not a CHOICE made by the Yugoslavs, only one that they accepted. FN, as you know, designed the rifle, as well as the tooling for it. The rifle was originally designed for the Belgian (FN designed) 7.65 x 53 cartridge, which FN tried to get all of their clients to adopt. In the end, only Belgium and a couple of South American countries adopted the round. The Yugoslavs chose the 8 x 57 cartridge (which they already used as their standard), which the intermediate-length action would accept without difficulty. So, the design was not changed.

As for the "safety-breech", that was an option, which the Yugoslavs did choose. They did this over concerns about poor-quality brass, since their ammunition facilities were not yet up to the same level as those of the other European nations. That was probably a wise decision, at the time. However, within 10 years, the issue was moot.




#13 Desert Rat

Desert Rat
  • Members
  • 13 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Las Vegas NV
  • Interests:Off Road Wheeling / Firearms /Video and Photography/ PC-Technology

Posted 17 October 2008 - 11:54 PM

Is the FN 7.65 x 53 a superior cartridge in military form or just like any other it has advantage/disadvantage and the push for this was just from a monetary stand point.

#14 bcp477

bcp477
  • Members
  • 25 posts

Posted 18 October 2008 - 10:07 AM

No, the 7.65 x 53 is not "superior" to the 8 x 57. Today, properly handloaded and used in a "modern" rifle, it can approximately equal the .308 Win. However, in it's ORIGINAL form and loading, it was somewhat inferior to the 8 x 57. Further, the rifles originally designed around this cartridge are NOT up to a modern handloaded version (I am speaking of the Belgian M1889, the Argentine M1891, etc.) - with the EXCEPTION of the Mauser 98 - pattern rifles, such as the 24/47 and M48. The 7.65 x 53 was certainly adequate as a military cartridge, for it's day. However, most of Europe by that time was under the influence, from a military arms and tactics point of view, of the Germans and their superior Mauser-pattern arms. The Yugoslavs had already adopted the 8 x 57 before this, as their standard service round. So, as the M1924 (as the rifle was designated) design certainly could handle this cartridge, they saw no need to adopt a somewhat inferior one. Cost containment certainly played a role - the Yugoslavs were relatively poor, as European nations went. Taken all together, there was no intelligent reason to switch to the Belgian round - so they didn't.

Incidently, as I alluded above, there certainly is nothing wrong with the 7.65 x 53. It, in fact, was innovative for it's time - really, the first short-length rifle cartridge designed to mimic (most of) the capability of full-length rifle rounds. That trend became SOP after WWII - hence, the .308 Win. (7.62 x 51), etc. However, since it was simply not adopted by most nations....and thus, was a commercial failure, on the whole, it was never developed to it's potential. Today, except in some old milsurp rifles and those who collect them (pricipally, the Argentine M1891....and a few Belgian M1889's that are still around)....it is almost completely overlooked by all...and not widely available.

#15 Desert Rat

Desert Rat
  • Members
  • 13 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Las Vegas NV
  • Interests:Off Road Wheeling / Firearms /Video and Photography/ PC-Technology

Posted 22 October 2008 - 08:18 PM

Thanks for more History, Its great to have some of the facts when doing some PM or trying to explain the history of these fine Bolt actions.

Besides the points you already made on why the 7.65 x 53 was not adopted, I wouldn't personally want a lower powered cartridge in this full size configuration of 98k rifle. i don't mind the smaller 7.62x51 in my FR8's but they are closer to a carbine in my opinion.

#16 AzRednek

AzRednek
  • Members
  • 3,416 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Phx Az

Posted 23 October 2008 - 02:01 AM

QUOTE (bcp477 @ Oct 18 2008, 04:07 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
However, since it was simply not adopted by most nations....and thus, was a commercial failure, on the whole, it was never developed to it's potential.


I wouldn't go as far as saying the 7.65 was a commercial failure. Similar to the 7X57, a handful of nations adopted the 7.65 and although short lived it was chambered in US sporting rifles prior to WW2. The South American countries that could have had their German manufactured Mausers chambered in 7X57, 7.65 or 8X57, most opted for the 7.65.

Apparently Turkey and Spain must have had good reasons to have converted to 8X57 after originally adopting the 7.65 and 7X57. I don't think the Spaniards took it as far as the Turks though to go through the trouble of re-barreling their rifles.

#17 Larry Gibson

Larry Gibson
  • Members
  • 45 posts

Posted 23 October 2008 - 07:31 PM

I wouldn't exactly say the 7.65 was "in it's ORIGINAL form and loading, it was somewhat inferior to the 8 x 57". The 8x57 came about 10 years after the 7.65 and had the benifity of a lot of powder and bullet development in those 10 years. Yes the 8x57 with it's spitzer sahped bullet was superior to the 210 gr RN of the first 7.65 loading. However the 7.65 was quickly loaded with a 185 gr FMJBT that was the ballistic twin of the 196 gr 8mm FMJBT. With both at 2450 fps or so there's not much difference between them. Norma and Hornady 150 gr loadings are the ballistic equal of the 7.62x51 NATO (with slightly lower pressures due to the larger case capacity of the 7.65) given equal barrel lengths. In the M98 actioned M1909 both the 7.65 and the 8mm, when loaded with equal weight bullets at the same pressure are pretty equal ballistically. I shoot both cartridges extensively and wouldn't give a nickel for any difference between the two. However when comparing the military cartridges of each it is a toss up. The 196 gr load of the 8x57 is pretty much equal to the 186 gr 7.65 load. On the other hand with the lighter weight bullets the German and Turk milsurp ammo is considerably hotter than the few comparable 7.65 milsurp rounds I've tested. Interesting topic.

Larry Gibson

#18 AzRednek

AzRednek
  • Members
  • 3,416 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Phx Az

Posted 23 October 2008 - 08:34 PM

It would be interesting to read the history behind the govt's reason for selecting the cartridges that they did. I've often wondered why most South American govts selected 7.65 but the most populated country, Brazil picked 7X57. As far as I know none of the South American countries selected 8X57.

I wonder how the 7.65 ballistics compares to the original 8MM with the .318 bore size. My guess is the 7.65 had the advantage.

#19 Larry Gibson

Larry Gibson
  • Members
  • 45 posts

Posted 24 October 2008 - 12:10 PM

AzRedneck

At least one South American country used the 8x57; Equador. I've been shooting about 1500 rounds of their ammo.

Larry Gibson

#20 bcp477

bcp477
  • Members
  • 25 posts

Posted 24 October 2008 - 02:58 PM

Thanks, AzRed and Larry for the additional info. Of course, I was speaking in general terms in my posts, but thanks for the corrections and more precise information. I must say that I've always been intrigued with the 7.65 x 53....and I've had a mild interest in having a rifle (in that chambering) at some point. It is a pity, in my opinion, that this cartridge is not more popular today.








0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users