Jeff H

Citric acid is also easy to obtain and reasonably cheap - I got some (powdered) in the canning section at WM the other day because the Bulk Store was out. Just under a half pound for just under $5. That's "expensive" relative to what you can find it for online in larger quantities. Very safe to use AND dispose of. Oddly, everywhere I asked about it, I got fearful "whadd'ya need THAT for?!" replies, so it's not like it would be any better than trying to buy nitric I suppose. Ignorance has few bounds but I am still surprised at times. Just tell them you are canning tomatoes. Here is an excellent (and long) thread about using citric acid to clean cartridge brass. It also speaks of stainless and the effects of citric acid solutions on the same, so there is a lot of useful information here. At least one of the posters is a chemist and others have significant experience. I have used this forum for a long time and there is very little Internet ignorance infused. http://castboolits.gunloads.com/showthread.php?t=83572&highlight=citric+acid+passivation+brass I have not used it on stainless myself yet.

One of the best things about it is that you never stop learning new stuff - sometimes from an old sage, sometimes from someone who just jumped in and discovered something useful just because ignorance introduces some amount of objectivity. Nice work on the Mauser. It will be a source of much more satisfaction as you continue to use and refine it. Of course, you do realize that you have wandered into a realm from which you will never find your way back out of, don't you?

That's one very fine-looking Mauser. I especially like the wood details where you transition from the girth about the mag well to a more slender features on either end and the proportions are excellent as well. Your bolt jobs sure look nice too.

Those are nice. I have missed a lot of neat things in the past few years.

Wow, Don, that looks fantastic! Redfield peep? I needed a peep for my Rossi 92 lever but couldn't see $80 for an aluminum sight - couldn't "see" meant couldn't "afford." I picked up a new-old Williams FP for a Remington 740/760 from ebay and went to work with the files. I flattened the back of the base and did some sculpting on the underside of the beam to clear the locking lugs and now have a $17 peep on my lever. I saw a lot of them on ebay for obscure actions that sure looked like they would be adaptable to a Mauser. I even saw one that I thought about turning backwards and screwing the aperature in from the other side or turning the aperature carriage around. The floor plate looks VERY nice! Everything does but that was a particularly artful, tasteful touch executed with good judgment. EDIT: That Butler Creek stock even looks great. What kind of paint was that?

It's an Argentine then. I never before noticed any markings on it besides a "4" on the bottom, but I took it out and got it in bright light. It's right where the cartridges have slid across it for years and is now almost indiscernible. I will put up with it until someone in need of one has a Swede to trade. Thanks, Don.

Thanks, Don. It's just been easier to load three than to run to a show and paw through the bins. My last Swede part was a actually follower and I put it in a mutt I sold to a fella who wouldn't be able to fix it himself. If the Argentine has more taper than the Swede, the follower in my rifle may not be original. The base of the first 6.5x55 round lies against the hump but the rest of the case does not. I may make the required adjustment on the one I have and save the gas it takes to get to a show.

That would probably look even better - everything from the front to the rear guard screws would "flow" visually.

If you're talkinig about milling flats on it, I did an original floorplate like that once and it looked nice. The widths of the 3 flats tapered from back to front and I melted the edges where the flats met. Where the catch hole was in the back was its own facet and I did the same on the front but made that one concave and swept it into the tongue my Dad welded on for a hinge. I had to do it all by hand so it took a while. Since I did it by hand, there was an almost imperceptible convex to the flats but I believe that looked better than what perfectly flat facets would have looked like. I looked in the safe to see if I could get a pic but it must have been on one of my Dad's because I don't have it. He does the machine-work and welding, I do the hand-work on the metal and most of the wood-work. We trade skills when building. There was not a lot of meat to work with and the angles were very shallow but it did look very classy. I believe it ended up on a small ring 98 chambered in .25 Souper.

Can't answer on the spring myself because I have not had a probelme with one but I do have a follower that gives me grief. The follower is from a 7.65 Argentine and I am using it in a 6.5x55. Last round won't even go into the mag right because of the way the bump on the follower crowds the rounds. It was the cleanest, nicest follower I had and I have meant to fix it but have just been loading three at a time anyway so I won't worry about it until I know I will get a chance to hunt with it.

I have not been to Midway's site in quite a while but I got several Adams & Bennett barrels for around $70 each about ten years ago. The 6.5x55 shoots beyond what I could ever have inagined - first two three shot groups were all touching. My Dad ended up with the .338-06 I got and his first group was three into an inch. I don't know if they were all like that or what they cost these days but either of those would have been a bargain at twice what I paid. The 7x57 is still in the safe and the .35 Whelen went to a friend who left it a the 'smiths' two years ago and still hasn't seen it. They don't gleam inside like some but the two we have shot were impressive. Nothing wrong with Douglas, Shaw or McGowen either. I just grabbed a bunch of cheap barrels as they went on sale. Nice stock too. I have used several Boyd's laminates but I trimmed a lot of wood off of them first.

Not that this is gospel, and I no longer own a 94 to check, but this (see link) is fairly typical of what I have always heard about the barrel length issue on the 94 Carbine. I noted when I read this again that the legal import length was 18" and the Swedes were just under that - not under 16", but under 18". I find this believable because it was explained to me by either Taurus or Rossi some years ago that their import barrel length limit on handguns was 3". I found it odd that they catered to my favorite "short" barreled revolver length and ask what prompted the 3" in lieu of the more common 2". I was advised that they had, in fact, not gone to 3" to please me specifically, but to meet import restrictions. http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0BQY/is_4_53/ai_n27161889/?tag=content;col1 Like I said - not necessarily gospel, as he may be repeating the same stuff I have heard for many years but a quick measure of an original will tell if there is enough barrel to lop a bit off to get to a nice crown. I wouldn't bet the crown is damaged at all anyway as the extension provided a fair amount of protection from nicks and dings, while it may not protect it from cleaning rod wear. So, what's the status of this project? Anything to take pictures of yet?

I know mine was an add-on as the seam was apparent and the extension was unblued but had a patina that made it not so garish as bare metal. Looking into the end of it, it gave the appearance of having been counterbored because the bore of the extension was ocnsiderably larger than the actual rifle bore.

Not a chance I would be willing to take with the BATF myself. Being a 94, one could possibly trade it for a couple M38s in decent shape. When I bought my 94 it was $300 and the M38s were going for less than $150. I trimmed an M38 back to 20", added a Boyd's walnut stock which I took a lot of wood off of and D/T'd a TC Contender base to the last barrel step and it was a gem handling and shooting.

I did this on a Swedish M38 and it worked marvelously. I was quite tickled with my cheap setup that was low and uncomplicated.

I put an A&B 6.5x55 on my '09 Argentine action and it shoots so well that it's just not funny. One-hole three shot groups using 160 grain RNs. Never expected that from a $70 barrel. I have experience with Douglas and have always been pleased but the A&B really surprised me. It may be a fluke or it may be they just really are decent barrels, but there is a 7x57 A&B barrel waiting in the safe for "some day" and I couild only hope that it shoots so well.

Two things to consider: 1) diverting esaping gas from the shooter's face in the event of a failed cartridge case, which is probably less likely today with cartridge brass manufacturing standards being what they are, is where the venting system probably plays its most important role. Soldiers were not reloading their cartridges, so incipient case head separation was not an issue - failure of new (not necessarily so well made) brass was. One of the Mauser brothers, Paul, I believe, lost an eye himself to this particular failure. Diverting the gas, as is done in the '98 can be done in pre '98s and I have seen some done properly and some done improperly. It doesn't do a lot of good to vent the reciever ring and not the bolt. 2) a "blow-up" is sort of a vague description of a failure, but let's consider what could happen if an over pressure (as it would pertain to the action coming apart and not the brass) were to occur. First, it does not necessarily take ONE round to cause the failure. Many significantly over-pressure rounds, over time, will cause damage over time. Who's holding the rifle if/when it lets go is anyone's guess. Will it be you, one of your kids, a buddy, the guy you sell it to, the guy who buys it from him? Diverting escaping gas is one thing, while the forces imposed on the bolt and reciever is another. The gas venting system will not reduce the affects of over-pressure beating the action and lugs up over time and may keep some of the gas and debris out of one's face if the action comes apart, but it will not help at all with the shrapnel that does not fit through the firing pin hole. My own personal concern with using a pre '98 for anything other than the lower pressure cartridges would be point two (above). Modern brass seems to address a lot of what happens in point one. Could the ears eventually shear off the bolt? I don't know and I don't intend to find out first-hand, but the people who made these rifles over a hundred years ago recognized a need for more strength as cartridge pressures began to be increased. I also think it is terribly irresponsible of anyone selling a rifle chambered for 7.62 CETME td advertise it as a .308 Winchester, regardless of the pressure differences.

Beautiful rifle and one of my favorite cartridges. Fantastic deal too.

I would ditch the washers but save the screws. I like the hex screws and have been replceing the old screws with hex screws from B-Square. I have never had an action srew work loose, so I don't keep the lock screws on the old ones. Handy to keep one of the supplied hex wrenches instead of a screwdriver too. Even though I have never needed one after putting the rifle in the stock when everything is done.

I got lucky. Mine was a Columbian from when they were plentiful and no one thought twice about sporterizing them. My Dad had a .257 take-off barrel he found sitting in the corner of a gun shop years ago and he put the two together for my first custom Mauser/first "real rifle." I know the action is older than I am for certain, but he believes the barrel may be too. For how well it shoots, I can't understand why someone would have taken it off of something.

On the bottom of the barrel? At one time, it was required that the importer of the arm stamp it. That's about all I could think of. Looking closely at the ones you see at the shows, you will run across one from time to time with such a stamp, usually located in an obscure spot and it small letters. It was also required at one time that certain of the arm's original markings were "scrubbed" and you will find defaced recievers with the crests ground off.

Any one, or a combination of the possible causes mentioned could be right - or something that none of us have thought of which may only be obvious if we were shooting the rifle. It's a matter of looking at the most plausible explanations first, without ruling out the others, and eliminating variables one at a time. To 99-100's point, your muzzle could be fine for the most part, but have different effects with different projectiles. The gas that propels the bullets will escape between the muzzle and the projectile as it exits and the jets of gas will be affected (directed) by the base of the bullet. So, one bullet may not shoot well at all or another may shoot exceptionally well even if you have the crown recut. In addition, and in response to your question above, the shape of the nose, base, length of the bearing surface of the bullet all play a part in how close the full-diameter portion of the bullet is to the rifling. Overall length of two loaded cartridges with two different weights of projectiles could produce the same distance from bearing surface to rifling and two same-weight (but differently shaped) bullets could produce a difference in that distance. If you are not loading the cartridges yourself, you are getting the bullet shape and seating depth the manufacturer chose for you. I have found on several rifles that I can experiment and find two "lighter than standard" projectiles of the same weight, one of which I can seat far enough out to get close to the rifling but the other cannot be seated far enough out. Narrowing things down to the most likely causes and then picking at each one individually is a god place to start, but experimenting is how you will rule any of them out and narrow the possible causes further.

I agree with those doubting the .001" making a big difference. I have shot a lot of 7mm and 6.5 originals and new commercial stuff over the years and have found that it's usually one or both ends of the barrel that presents the challenges, while what's in the middle can look like it's growing hair and not cause serious problems. One Swede in particular, with a very nice bore and new crown would group .263" CIL 160 grain RNs, .264" Hornady 160 grain RNs and .264" Sierra 160 grain SPs into an inch and a quarter to an inch at a hundred yards. It shot 140 grain and 87 grain bullets as well - as long as I seated them very long. Tried Remington 6.5mm 140s and they were a disaster - 4" groups. A bit of correspondence with Remington and it became clear - their 6.5 140 was made for the 6.5 Remington Mag. and had a dual diameter, with the front part of the projectile being very undersized. What this did was not allow them to be seated so the full-diameter portion was close enough to the rifling - the problems were not because the undersized part didn't "fit" the grooves. Same thing with the 7x57 - I usually found long throats, so the longer (and heavier) bullets always worked better. Many lighter (shorter) bullets can be seated long enough to work well, but some just don't quite get there depending on the nose configuration. If your European ammo shoots well but not the US-made ammo, in all likelihood the crown is at least not horrible. If you look at the US ammo you are shooting and see that the bullet weight is more along the lines of modern tastes (130 to 154 grains) it could well be that the other end of the barrel - the throat, is what is challenging your patience. They may just not be as close to the rifling as the longer European bullets.

My '95 came pre-bubba-ized and with a Choate stock. I really liked the stock except that it was definitely a scope-only proposition, and probably with high rings at that. I had to really squeeze my cheeck hard against the stock to see the iron sights. It was uncomfortable sighting and painful shooting. Mine had a built-in trigger guard, so you end up loosing the drop-bottom magazine feature.

I read his description and terms and would not buy from him just based on the arrogance that he shows in that. If you feel that you have to be that rude and abrasive to prospective buyers, there's a reason - a lot of people must have gotten junk from him and complained to him, so he starts out on the defensive - a rather offensive defensive. I bought a set of single action grips from a guy like that once. He started out with some insulting remarks about making sure YOU know what grip frame YOU have because HIS grips fit the frames.... Turned out he didn't know squat because they were the most ill-fitted grips ever and it wasn't that either of us mistook the frame - he drilled the holes in the wrong place, period. Got VERY snotty when I e-mailed to try to rectify it, and of course would not make it right because I was obviously a snivelling idiot who didn't know my frame and wanted him to pay for my mistake. Almost makes me think it was the same guy. On top of that, if it's not safe to use, he's going to get someone hurt and going to just make things worse for the responsible gun owners as well.