ken98k Posted November 22, 2008 Report Share Posted November 22, 2008 Someone today told me Argetine 1909 receivers were soft. I have never heard this before, I always heard and read just the opposit, that they are very desireable for building sporters. Any views on the subject? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
donmarkey Posted November 22, 2008 Report Share Posted November 22, 2008 Argies are know to be soft, but recarberizing solves that problem so I don't see an issue. they are still my favorite action. -Don Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ken98k Posted November 22, 2008 Author Report Share Posted November 22, 2008 Argies are know to be soft, but recarberizing solves that problem so I don't see an issue. they are still my favorite action. -Don Do you mean Agentine made receivers or German or both? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimro Posted November 23, 2008 Report Share Posted November 23, 2008 Argentine made receivers are the ones that tend to be soft according to most sources. Jimro Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
z1r Posted November 23, 2008 Report Share Posted November 23, 2008 Argentine made receivers are the ones that tend to be soft according to most sources. Jimro No, the German made receivers tend to be soft. The Argentine made receivers were made later. Early examples may be soft but later made receivers are harder. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimro Posted November 24, 2008 Report Share Posted November 24, 2008 Thanks for the correction z. Jimro Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
z1r Posted November 24, 2008 Report Share Posted November 24, 2008 Sorry, I think I write too quickly and what I write is too short. Don't mean to come accross so curtly. The DWM receivers were pack hardened so they will test real soft on the outside. They are harder on the inside where it counts but they are still soft in the scheme of things. I got four of the New unissued FMAP receivers and they are as hard as any VZ24 I ever had tested. I also have two older FMAP receivers and they too are adequate, enough so that I will build a .376 Steyr on one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimro Posted November 26, 2008 Report Share Posted November 26, 2008 Hmmm... pack hardening shouldn't cause a soft surface unless it is done wrong and causes carbon emission from the steel instead of carbon uptake... Makes me wonder what went wrong. Also makes me wonder if the 1906 Obendorf I bought from my brother is going to be soft.... And don't worry about "sounding" harsh, everybody sounds curt through text. Jimro Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
z1r Posted November 26, 2008 Report Share Posted November 26, 2008 Jimro, You misunderstand. What I meant by pack hardening is that carbonaceous material was used on important surfaces like lugs & lug seats, cocking cams, extractor cams, etc. Previously used material was used on (packed onto) less critical areas. That's why the outside surfaces will test really soft but may not truely indicate how hard the "important" surfaces are. That's why, when having a receiver heat treated, a facility that uses a method that envelopes the entire part is prefered. that way when you test an exterior surface you get an accurate representation of the more important inner surface. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimro Posted November 29, 2008 Report Share Posted November 29, 2008 Got it, by re-using the carbon donor material it slowed the rate of transfer leaving the steel soft. Makes me wonder why they were pinching pennies to need to re-use pack material. Jimro Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AzRednek Posted November 30, 2008 Report Share Posted November 30, 2008 Makes me wonder why they were pinching pennies to need to re-use pack material. Jimro Just speculating on my part but most likely Mauser's competitors were knocking on doors in Argentina. Mauser was likely pinching pennies any where they could to keep their price as low as possible. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
z1r Posted November 30, 2008 Report Share Posted November 30, 2008 Just speculating on my part but most likely Mauser's competitors were knocking on doors in Argentina. Mauser was likely pinching pennies any where they could to keep their price as low as possible. Mauser, actually DWM, was being smart and saving money in the process. The outside surfaces don't need much if any hardening so reusing material makes perfect sense. Again, lug seats were, on the whole, fine for the spec cartridge. The fact that these receivers exhibit setback quite frequently has nothing (directly) to do with the methods used for case hardening. Instead, you have to realize that they were hardened to spec. That spec being set by the contract negotiated with Argentina which also included the ammo to be used. The receivers were adequate for the rounds spec'd in the contract. That does not make it ok for today's powders or today's cartridges. Maybe a crude analogy might be a car engine. Say a '68 Hemi was adquate as built for the 425+ HP it was rated at. Now let's say someone changed gas formulations that netted 50% extra HP simply by running the new gas. That same engine that was perfectly fine with the original formulation would now be under-built relative to the new gas' buring characteristics. Make sense? In other words, 1909 Argentines were fine for the original 7.65x53 round they were built for but not modern powders. They WILL develop setback. How quickly is the question. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.