gun nutty

Industrial Heat Treat CO 454 West 600 North, Salt Lake City, UT 84103 (801) 363-7318

Have you tried different cast bullets? I use the pre-lubed hard-cast in my 45 and 9mm and clean-up isn't too bad. I've used the knurled-type lead (I think Hornady offered these), and clean-up was more difficult.

Based on the article: A "Watts-bath" is a nickel-sulfate solution. For the Watts bath, a ph of 4.5-5.0 and higher temperatures gives a matte finish. The table included ran the Watts bath to 160. If you're using a sulfate solution and the kit gives ranges for ph and temp, I'd try the extremes on each and see what gives. I've never nickel plated something. I've seen it done for increasing diameters for tolerancing (worn shaft sleeves, bearing areas, etc). The area was copper plated first then nickeled. Doing a full nickel is neat but new to me. The copper first stuff had a tendency to peel. I have a "nickeled" 45 Gvt. frame done by Metaloy and am very happy with it. A darker, matted nickel. I had talked to the guy on the phone about doing a rifle, but he said they only did smaller stuff. I guess a stripped receiver would be small. Dunno...

OK... Technical answer from the Navy... "Ordinarily on threads of fine lead, you feed the tool straight into the work in sucessive cuts. For coarse threads, it is better to set the compound rest at one-half of the included angle of the thread and feed along the side of the thread. For the last few finishing cuts, you should feed the tool straight in with the crossfeed of the lathe to make a smooth, even finish on both sides of the thread." "When you set the compound rest in this position.... This permits the chip to curl straight in, and it prevents the tearing of the thread. since the angle on the side of the threading tool is 30 degrees, the right side of the tool will shave the thread smooth and produce a smoother finish..." So, feeding in with the compound rest limits tearing of the threads by improving cutting action.

There are two ways of increasing the depth: With the cross-saddle and with the compound rest. Feeding-in directly in at 90 degrees with the saddle (or the compound rest) is quick and a good way to do rough or quick thread work. Feeding-in at 29.5 degrees with the compound rest imparts a smoother finish on the threads. That 0.5 degree relief alieveates the roughness by putting pressure on one side of the thread only (I think it benefits by cutting in only one direction - direct feed is actually cutting on both sides of the bit and thus in two directions). I've done it both ways and prefer the compound rest for finished threads. If I am chasing threads afterward with a die for final form, I just use the 90 degree plunge cut.

http://www.pfonline.com/articles/040102.html "Other Types of Nickel. To obtain other types of finishes such as satin nickel, organic additives are used and deposition conditions are altered. Deposits from a Watts bath are usually 7-10 mm thick, with the appearance dependent on the temperature and/or pH. At higher temperatures and a pH of 4.5-5.0, nickel deposits are matte. At 122F and a pH of 2.5-3.5, deposits are bright."

Hey, you can always use it at parades and funerals with the VFW...

The first picture you have is correct for INTERNAL threads (please note the bore thread tool). Rather than driving the bit into the stock from the outside, you are pulling the bit into the stock from the inside. The second and third pictures have the rest set correctly for EXTERNAL threads.

Wrong 29.5 degrees... You need to set it 29.5 degrees from the perpendicular, with perpendicular being with the compound rest set to do a straight plunge cut. Set the compound rest to a straight plunge cut. Read the indicator on the rest. It might be 0 degrees, it might be 90 degrees. Move the tail of the rest 29.5 degrees to the right. The indicators on the compound rest are reference points, and that's about it. You'll need to track things on your own.

I've used small strips of aluminum with double-sided sticky tape between the workpiece and the chuck jaws. I wonder how a cut-up aluminum can would work?

The "depth" of the belt (bolt-face to forward shoulder of belt) is 0.220". I'd set things to exactly that. If you don't have a headspace guage, you can make a simple plug on a lathe... I wouldn't do it for a shoulder headspace, but for the belted case I'd feel confident enough to make one. It would be a 0.532 diameter cylinder 0.220" long. You could make another 0.222 long for a MAX. You're headspacing on the shoulder when you re-size, so the belt is really irrelevant. There really isn't an advantage to setting it to the brass case. I would be concerned about sizing dies. If you make the chamber too short (setting the chamber on a very short belt), the reloading dies may not hit the shoulder of a fired case. You'd have to do some grinding on the dies then.

I have 3 of these stored-away for a rainy day... Tight bores. Look in the Reamer Co-Op; there are .308 reamers that are listed as working with these barrels. Trying to force a standard reamer might give "wobble" at the base and lead to an oversize chamber. The interesting thing about the barrels is the 1-15 twist. Excellent for lighter .308 bullets (110 to 150gr). I'd love to hear from someone who used these with the 110gr spire points. Normally I consider the .308Win overkill on prarie dogs, but with a mild load and a 110gr bullet? Might be the ticket to some neat splatter. Recoil could be mild. The barrels originally had open sights, so you have two screw-holes down at the end of the barrel. I'd cut and re-crown to clear-up the screw holes, but to each his own.

Absolutely not. The belt on a bottle-necked case with a sharp shoulder angle is worthless... The belt is a carryover from the old H&H rounds, and I believe it was for use in double rifles. It was an available large-capacity case to build shorter wildcat rounds on, and factories followed suit. If you reload a 7mm Mag, .338 Mag, or whatever, you headspace on the shoulder. Look at the newest magnums... Large fat case with no belt. Even with rimmed cases, you should still headspace on the shoulder. Reamers and chambers need to headspace on something, and manufacturers use the belt to headspace on when chambering. The chamber is set to a certain spec, and the base-to-shoulder distance is part of that spec. Setting the belt headspace lets all else fall in place.

My understanding is that , for "high velocity" cartidges, the same loads that give optimal velocity for a long barrel will also give optimal velocity in shorter barrels. One issue with optimal loads is report and muzzle flash. And let's not forget recoil due to the lightened firearm. Switching to a faster burning powder may not increase velocity, but it helps in mitigating the above three factors above. I used to be very concerned about maximum velocity; now I mostly focus on target performance. I'm a BIG fan of RL7 and 4198. VARGET and 4895 might also be good candidates. All should reduce blast and report.

If it feeds well, you have a nice sporter. Appears to be a nice piece of walnut, and the schnabel is executed well. The bolt handle work also appears very well done. The only things I don't like are the white grip spacer and the forward sling attachment. The white spacer doesn't match the rest of the rifle and the forward sling stud will put downward pressure on the barrel if using the sling. Both issues are easily correctible.

Now this is interesting... 1. The 6.5X55 Cartridge fits the MN magazine, "oh-so-sweetly". My immediate thought was "if it only had a rim..." 2. The base-to-shoulder length of the 6.5X55 is just 0.023" shorter than the 7X57. I don't have a 7X57 case to try in the MN to verify fit. 3. Midway sells 7X57 Rimmed Norma brass for $20/20. 4. The 7X57 Rimmed rim diameter is .532, according to my reference. If the 7X57 Mauser fits in the magazine, the 7X57 Rimmed case is an great candidate. The 7x57 is the parent for the .257 Roberts .244 Rem and 6.5X57. If feeding is good, this could open the MN to a number of cartridges. I'm not sure that the MN ejector will hold down the .532 rim though... Might be a winner. Thoughts?

Douglas offers .411 barrels and specifically lists the .405 as a chambering option; they will long (finish) chamber: http://www.benchrest.com/douglas/chamberings.html The Douglas barrel is 1.2" in the chamber area, which will work well with the MN (1.225"). I think most barrels are about 1.2, but some might run 1.25", which would just plain suck.

The MN is designed around the 7.62X54 in every way. A real strong candiate is the 405 Win. Rim (.540 vs .563) and overall length are close (405 is just a bit longer). I suspect that it won't feed from the magazine though. The biggest problem that I see is the feed ramp. Mausers and most other actions have the feed ramp forward of the magazine. Not so with the MN, as it's situated midway in the magazine opening. Opening the magazine for larger cartridges (45-70, 405, etc.) eliminates the feed ramp partially if not entirely. The long ejector holds the rear the case (the rim) down and the feed ramp centers and guides the point of the cartridge into the chamber. Insert a 7.62X54 round into the magazine and push the bolt forward, looking carefully at where the case hits the ramp. Look also at the way the rear of the case is held-down by the ejector. Smaller diameter rims just don't seem to position the case right at the rear. The actual case head diameter seems irrelevant. It's the rim and cartridge body taper doing all of the work. I'm guessing that the best candidates for this action are rounds based-on the original Russian case, or cases with a rim diameter very close. 30/40 Krag or 303 British might work well also. 30-30, 44 Mag, 444 Marlin rattle around too much. Looking at my magazine, I think a .32 caliber case would be about max without the front of the magazine (cartridge neck area). Getting back to to the .405 Win, I think it might make a good donor case for a 7mm, 6.5mm, or .257 wildcat. The case head diameter is .462 (vs the .470 of the 7x57). Using a 7x57 reamer and running it in short to the .462 diameter point would allow using a standard 7x57 reamer. The depth is easy to calculate via a CAD system or a bit of trig. Standard dies could have their bases ground off by the shorted amount. Other than grinding the dies, there would be no additional cost. A good selection of cartridges, or rather their respective reamers and dies, would be available; .244 Rem, .257 Roberts, 6.5X57, 7X57, and 8X57.

Dumb question, as I've never tried this... Why not remove the decapping assembly from the re-sizing die, run the case in to form a headspace shoulder, and fill with a charge of Bullseye or W231 (No bullet)? 20 grains of W231 would be dandy. Top off the charge with cream-of-wheat and a paraffin plug, keep the cases upright and head to the range. You can trim the cases to length after fireforming. Or maybe the .35 caliber expander would be easier. Heh. Reloading is so much fun...

strait shooter: I think I mis-understood what you were asking for. My apologies. My searches on the 416 Taylor showed using 458 Win cases to form the Taylor case. 300 Wim Mag brass would be a good solution, if cheap and plentiful. I'd be very interested in seeing a Mauser built on this. I think Remington did shooters a dis-service by not legitimizing the Taylor case; they should have released the Taylor round in lieu of the .416 Rem Mag case.

With the base of the 416 bullet taking-up so much volume inside the case, and the 300 Win Mag having a shorter neck, I don't see where you'll get much added powder capacity over the "standard" Taylor round. I'd just go with the Taylor. Your powder capacity will be limited by the overall length of the magazine for both cartridges, no? The 300 Win base case might be be longer, but you will still be limited to the overall length of the Mauser magazine; conversely, you can always seat the bullets out further in the Taylor.

A bolt handle bent-down is closer to the right hand for subsequent cyclings of the action, allowing more rapid follow-up shots. Bent-down allows easier carry and will snag less while walking through brush and getting pulled from out of a truck. Bent-down fits in scabbards better, whether on a horse or ATV. Bent-down looks better, allowing a more "symetrical" look to the rifle. If you like the thing straight, keep it. It won't interfere with open sights or a scope mount. I doubt most major armies converted to bent-down because it looks better; I'm sure they had an idea on what they wanted.

Kyle, why not do some practice first? Why screw-up a perfectly good barrel? When you can consistently cut good threads on a practice piece, you're ready for the big-time. First, LR Mausers have the following thread data: 12V 1.10 major diameter .625 Shank length (approx) I'd chuck up a scrap piece of 1.25" round stock steel and play. 4" would be fine. You'll need to measure the depth from the front of the receiver face to the inner torque ring, and add some for "crush" and front ring clearance. 0.005"? Z1r? Your measured clearance + clearance is the shank length. Chuck up the piece in either a 6-jaw or 4-jaw, dial it in to zero. Cut the shank to 1.10 and the proper depth. Setup your threads and speeds and cut-away. I'd cut to about 80%, and with the threaded portion still chucked-up, start testing the reciever onto the threads by hand. You'll want to keep the outside diameter at 1.10. Threads tend to "grow" while cutting (there is some displacement action as well as cutting action). I've found a file helps break some of the moved metal.

Here links to the article I've referenced: http://i27.photobucket.com/albums/c168/gun...0Gibbspage1.jpg http://i27.photobucket.com/albums/c168/gun...0Gibbspage2.jpg http://i27.photobucket.com/albums/c168/gun...0Gibbspage3.jpg

Sure. I've posted before on this, but will gladly do it again. My .30 Gibbs is an Interarms Mark X originally chambered in 30/06 and re-chambered to the Gibbs. I have the 24" barreled action sitting in an old Ramline stock, Control low mounts, and a Leupold 3x9 Compact scope. I added a 1" Pachmayer Deccelerator recoil pad. Recoil is very mild, at least the perception, and I "blame" that pad and the synthetic stock. The barrel is fully floated and the recoil lug is fully bedded. I "floated" the action in that only the lug area and tang contact the stock; I can run a sheet of paper along the sides of the action; it was something to try at the time, and I fully intended to fully bed the action as well - but hey, my groups were too damn good and I left it alone. I can cover 3 rounds with a quarter if I do my part at the bench. I haven't altered the action or magazine; I can load and feed three from the magazine reliably. 5 won't fit (due to the wide shoulder), and the fouth is "iffy". I settled on one load 64.5 grains of IMR 4831 win the old Barnes X-Bullet. Velocity was just under 3000 fps at 10' from the muzzle (It averaged around 2950, so muzzle velocity is probably right close to 3000). Historically, the older long X-Bullets (without the three groves) generated higher pressures early, and I suspect that I could do a little better on the velocity with a boat-tail. A bit about dies... I initially ordered a set blindly... very bad idea. I had to send-in 3 fire-formed cases to 4D Die Company to get things going. My chamber was to spec, but the original set from RCBS was minimal, and I had to run the cases through 2X to get them to chamber. I'm certain if I would have sent fire-formed cases to RCBS, all would have been good as well. About data and results... My data matches an article from Wolfe Publishing (I think by Roger Stowers). Loads were very close in maximum read pressures and final velocities. I also have an earlier article ("The .30 Gibbs - A Magnum Cartridge It Ain't") with loading data that is very similar, but with final velocities much lower. No two rifles will perform exactly the same, and I've seen rifles chambered for the same cartridge with the same length barrel that perform very differently, especially in terms of velocity. I watched the primers, and in terms of rounding or flatness, they are no different than the 30/06 loads I use that match the maximuns listed in most reloading manuals. Fire-forming the cases involved necking them up to .35 and back down to .30 in the .30 Gibbs die to create a shoulder to headspace on. I believe I worked up to 20 grains of W231, filled the remainder of the case with cream of wheat, and pushed a block of parrafin wax onto the case mouth to form a plug. Shoot downwind or you'll get showered with cream of wheat. The following data is from the Wolfe article: