Looking to learn about 7.62 NATO/.308 Win Mausers

[t.emard]

Hello all,


I have been given the opportunity to purchase a Spanish 1916 Mauser chambered in .308, and I couldn't bring up any real research on my own about the history of Spanish Mausers. There doesn't even seem to be a basic Wiki page. I'm looking for a rifle that I can use without worry, and debate seems split between people who think this rifle is a pipe bomb waiting for the wrong chamber pressure, or it's a workhorse that can handle any ammunition you can toss its way. I'm curious what this forum thinks.


To be more precise, I've heard lots about Isreali Mausers being essentially tough as nails and able to chew through any .308 or 7.62 NATO (standard loads, we're not talking reloads here). I'd like to have a Mauser I can supply by simply going down to Walmart and grabbing whatever is cheapest on the shelf, rather than having to worry about getting a particular type of ammunition with a particular psi and a particular bullet weight. I already have headaches enough feeding my M1 Garand!


Any advice you can give me is greatly appreciated.



A few final questions from a rookie who is very new to the Mauser world:

-What books are recommended for in depth dives into the history of the Mauser, especially conversions to .308 and variations from other nations.
-Where can I find an Isreali Mauser in .308? I don't see any on gunbroker, gunsinternational, all my usual haunts.
-Do .308 cartridges require different stripper clips? I bought a pack for my new-to-me M48 and a case of 8mm, but .308 is preferred. Cheaper, easier to find.

 

[WallyG.]

If the converted 1916 spanish rifle is marked FR-7 then it was designed for a lower powered cartridge called "7.62 CETME" which is lower power and the gun uses a short action receiver not intended to long endure for full power 7.62 NATO rounds. Many are found with bolt set back after doing so. If the Spanish rifle is marked FR-8 then it uses the large K-98 style action and should be fine to shoot full power 7.62 NATO cartridges. Most of the Israeli rifles were either purpose built by FN in 7.62 NATO or K-98 actions re-barreled and converted to 7.62 by the Israeli's... and both are fine with NATO spec cartridges. This is a bit generalized info and I do not claim expert status.... but I do have examples of both.

 

[WallyG.]

Norway produced some K-98 profiled .308 barrels that were sold on the surplus parts market several years ago… so it would be possible to locate a gun like what I had built with one of the barrels… using a Russian capture parts receiver and the “new” surplus Norwegian barrel. And I suspect that more than one modern barrel manufacturer has offered 7.62 NATO K-98 profiled barrels for similar purposes… So other sources are out there.

 

[Casualk98collector]

Generally, the Spanish mausers that were re chambered to 308 are not considered strong enough for modern ammo. Im greatly simplifying the matter (and there are exceptions) but I would suggest you avoid this gun, ESPECIALLY if all you have available is commercial off the shelf ammo. My response will bring out differing opinions, but I would not fire modern hunting ammo in a gun converted to older 308 standards.
Izzy Mausers in 7.62x51 are getting harder to find and are more expensive than you'd expect. If you really just want a Mauser pattern blaster, I suggest you look in 8MM, as the ammo is now somewhat commercially available.
The only Mauser in 308 I would trust would be an Izzy conversion or a Spanish FR8 (And they are also getting rare and expensive).

As for feeding your Garand.....the Garand Collectors Association did a piece back about 5 years ago that dispelled the 'can only fire XX grain bullet safely!'. Their report concluded that as long as the ammo was factory loaded and under something like 230 GN, the gun wil be fine. (Please do your own research on gn weights, I dont remember the actual number, but they did publish extensive research on the topic). Now if your concern is proce per round.....well.....welcome to the world of 'large caliber centerfire'. The norm is now .75 to 2.50 a round.

 

[Fal Grunt]

The largest factor here is what kind of Spanish 308? Generally I don’t recommend any pre-1898 308 conversion. They are usually done in a poor manner.

I’m still shooting old surplus 8mm, but I regularly see surplus for well under $1 a round, usually closer to .50, with occasional .25-.30. I’d rather buy a beater vz-24 for $300-$350 and shoot surplus, than pay $1.50 for 308.

 

[Berthier]

If the converted 1916 spanish rifle is marked FR-7 then it was designed for a lower powered cartridge called "7.62 CETME" which is lower power and the gun uses a short action receiver not intended to long endure for full power 7.62 NATO rounds. Many are found with bolt set back after doing so. If the Spanish rifle is marked FR-8 then it uses the large K-98 style action and should be fine to shoot full power 7.62 NATO cartridges. Most of the Israeli rifles were either purpose built by FN in 7.62 NATO or K-98 actions re-barreled and converted to 7.62 by the Israeli's... and both are fine with NATO spec cartridges. This is a bit generalized info and I do not claim expert status.... but I do have examples of both.

7.62 CETME is not a lower pressure cartridge. It's a lower recoiling cartridge meant for the CETME rifle for firing on full auto. Santa Barbara arsenal lists the pressures for 7.62 NATO and CETME to be the same, while the FR7/FR8 manual says it's slightly lower pressure than the NATO cartridge. 7.62 CETME has a very light aluminum bullet being shot out by basically pistol powder. It's designed to lower recoil to increase the hit probability for full auto firing by sacrificing any long range ballistics.

The Mausers were always meant to fire the NATO cartridge, that Spain adopted before developing the CETME cartridge.

It's also not like 7mm Mauser is really any lower pressure than any other full power rifle cartridge. At least to their full power military loadings and not SAAMI underloaded crap. And btw, the K98a is a small ring mauser like the Spanish Mausers and no one tries to warn people about firing 7.92 out of them.

 

[Fal Grunt]

It's also not like 7mm Mauser is really any lower pressure than any other full power rifle cartridge. At least to their full power military loadings and not SAAMI underloaded crap. And btw, the K98a is a small ring mauser like the Spanish Mausers and no one tries to warn people about firing 7.92 out of them.

I'm going to disagree with these statements.

First, 7mm Mauser, when it was built for the 1893's and even the 1895's, was a lower pressure cartridge compared to modern "full power rifle cartridges".

Second, the K98a, is not a small ring mauser like the Spanish Mauser. The K98a is a 98, not a 93. There is a significant difference in both strength and gas handling. The common "large ring" "small ring" classification does a huge disservice to those that use it, and should really be a practice that dies with the boomer generation.

Third, there are a segment of the gun world who advocates against shooting K98a's. This is most often seen in the commercial gun world, where using a K98s receiver is generally discouraged. K98a's were discontinued, and according to many, the reason was due excessive headspace due to either the front ring stretching, or chamber growth, though it was likely a combination of both. I have not yet found any primary source documentation in any German archives to substantiate this.

 

[Berthier]

I'm going to disagree with these statements.

First, 7mm Mauser, when it was built for the 1893's and even the 1895's, was a lower pressure cartridge compared to modern "full power rifle cartridges".

Second, the K98a, is not a small ring mauser like the Spanish Mauser. The K98a is a 98, not a 93. There is a significant difference in both strength and gas handling. The common "large ring" "small ring" classification does a huge disservice to those that use it, and should really be a practice that dies with the boomer generation.

Third, there are a segment of the gun world who advocates against shooting K98a's. This is most often seen in the commercial gun world, where using a K98s receiver is generally discouraged. K98a's were discontinued, and according to many, the reason was due excessive headspace due to either the front ring stretching, or chamber growth, though it was likely a combination of both. I have not yet found any primary source documentation in any German archives to substantiate this.

I think it's fair that not all small ring mausers as the same, but realistically the differences in strength are more in gas handling than actual strength. The Spanish M1916s have the gas holes on the side of the receiver to vent gas out. It doesn't have to travel down the receiver and out the stripper clip notch like in 98s. Not saying that one is better than the other, but I do consider them equally safe. The Spanish military certainly did. You would think there would be some actual documentation from them if there was.

 

[WallyG.]

OP... I would suggest doing your own research about whether the 1916 Spanish rifles can handle full strength 7.62 NATO. The subject has come up before in many forums. Enough headspace issues have occured (bolt set back) from this combination that a segment of the gun world has cautioned against the practice... this was all that I was attempting to inform you of... academic arguement here does you no good towards your evaluation. If you want a 7.62 NATO firing Mauser... they are out there... choose wisely. Cheers!

 

[Berthier]

OP... I would suggest doing your own research about whether the 1916 Spanish rifles can handle full strength 7.62 NATO. The subject has come up before in many forums. Enough headspace issues have occured (bolt set back) from this combination that a segment of the gun world has cautioned against the practice... this was all that I was attempting to inform you of... academic arguement here does you no good towards your evaluation. If you want a 7.62 NATO firing Mauser... they are out there... choose wisely. Cheers!

Do your own research only works when there is actual information on these guns besides a bunch of uninformed internet gossip. This is no different than the Arisakas exploding myth. Everyone has lots of stories, but no actual verifiable documented proof.

Leg setback isn't even really a safety issue that the opposite, a brittle receiver, would be. The heat treating of a 98k is the same as an 1893.

 

[Fal Grunt]

I think it's fair that not all small ring mausers as the same, but realistically the differences in strength are more in gas handling than actual strength. The Spanish M1916s have the gas holes on the side of the receiver to vent gas out. It doesn't have to travel down the receiver and out the stripper clip notch like in 98s. Not saying that one is better than the other, but I do consider them equally safe. The Spanish military certainly did. You would think there would be some actual documentation from them if there was.

I am not using strength as a comparative term. Strength has nothing to do with gas handling. Gas handling may be a “strength” as one would note a positive, however that is not what I mean when I say the 98 is stronger than a 93. The 98 action is stronger in several aspects due to design. It is literally stronger.

The Spanish produced 93’s have an added gas vent on both the bolt and receiver, however these still do not equal the handling and more importantly the sealing of the 98. That is, directing gas where you want it to go, and preventing it from where you do not.

I AM saying a 98 is better, quantitatively and qualitatively.

Do your own research only works when there is actual information on these guns besides a bunch of uninformed internet gossip. This is no different than the Arisakas exploding myth. Everyone has lots of stories, but no actual verifiable documented proof.

Leg setback isn't even really a safety issue that the opposite, a brittle receiver, would be. The heat treating of a 98k is the same as an 1893.

There is substantial information, both primary sources, historical analysis, and modern analysis, available for research. Plenty of verifiable, documented proof.

Lug setback is not a safety issue, however it is an issue. It does happen, and it is a bummer. Once it happens, it is expensive to correct.

Lastly, the heat treating of a k98k is not the same as an 1893.

Your post is primarily uninformed internet gossip. There are plenty of resources available, as I stated, both primary sources, historical analysis, and modern analysis. Many of these are available on this very site, easily accessible. Others will take some time to find, translate, and understand.

 

[Berthier]

There is substantial information, both primary sources, historical analysis, and modern analysis, available for research. Plenty of verifiable, documented proof.

Then why don't you share some? I'm the only one in this thread that has posted any primary source documents.

Lastly, the heat treating of a k98k is not the same as an 1893.

Both were case hardened. All Mausers were.

 

[Fal Grunt]

Then why don't you share some? I'm the only one in this thread that has posted any primary source documents.

Both were case hardened. All Mausers were.

Be happy to.

Who told you ALL Mauser's were case hardened? Some guy on the internet? How about a primary source document?

Mauser K98 blueprints

In this thread I will post up scans of the original prints I have. in this way everyone will have access. Be patient as there are alot. I will have to process most of the files as they are too large.

www.k98kforum.com

Take a particularly close look at Blatt 1 Hulse and the heat treat routing card. (rec hardening a)

Those are about as DIRECT of a primary source as you can get.

Those two just scratch the surface. This is a whole rabbit hole that you can travel down. I've been trying to find the bottom of it for close to 5 years now. If you want a brief introduction to the topic I compiled and wrote this:

PRODUCTS

www.myersarms.com

 

[Berthier]

Be happy to.

Who told you ALL Mauser's were case hardened? Some guy on the internet? How about a primary source document?

Mauser K98 blueprints

In this thread I will post up scans of the original prints I have. in this way everyone will have access. Be patient as there are alot. I will have to process most of the files as they are too large.

www.k98kforum.com

Take a particularly close look at Blatt 1 Hulse and the heat treat routing card. (rec hardening a)

Those are about as DIRECT of a primary source as you can get.

Those two just scratch the surface. This is a whole rabbit hole that you can travel down. I've been trying to find the bottom of it for close to 5 years now. If you want a brief introduction to the topic I compiled and wrote this:

PRODUCTS

www.myersarms.com

That's nice and all, but what about the subject at hand: Spanish Mausers?

 

[Fal Grunt]

That's nice and all, but what about the subject at hand: Spanish Mausers?

Wow.

How's your Spanish? Look up EL ACERO Y FABRICACION DE FUSILES by Boado y Castro, José. It'll give you Spain's testing, analysis, comparison between several rifle factories processes, and what they settled on and why.

 

[Berthier]

Wow.

How's your Spanish? Look up EL ACERO Y FABRICACION DE FUSILES by Boado y Castro, José. It'll give you Spain's testing, analysis, comparison between several rifle factories processes, and what they settled on and why.

Just like everything related to Spanish Mausers, out of print and can't be found for sale. Also, not about the 50s 7.62NATO conversions.

It also looks like that book is more about the machines used to make the rifle, not how the rifles were made.

 

[Fal Grunt]

The book is literally about making the rifles.

It is publicly available as an OCR pdf.

 

[Magnum2230]

Generally, the Spanish mausers that were re chambered to 308 are not considered strong enough for modern ammo. Im greatly simplifying the matter (and there are exceptions) but I would suggest you avoid this gun, ESPECIALLY if all you have available is commercial off the shelf ammo. My response will bring out differing opinions, but I would not fire modern hunting ammo in a gun converted to older 308 standards.
Izzy Mausers in 7.62x51 are getting harder to find and are more expensive than you'd expect. If you really just want a Mauser pattern blaster, I suggest you look in 8MM, as the ammo is now somewhat commercially available.
The only Mauser in 308 I would trust would be an Izzy conversion or a Spanish FR8 (And they are also getting rare and expensive).

As for feeding your Garand.....the Garand Collectors Association did a piece back about 5 years ago that dispelled the 'can only fire XX grain bullet safely!'. Their report concluded that as long as the ammo was factory loaded and under something like 230 GN, the gun wil be fine. (Please do your own research on gn weights, I dont remember the actual number, but they did publish extensive research on the topic). Now if your concern is proce per round.....well.....welcome to the world of 'large caliber centerfire'. The norm is now .75 to 2.50 a round.

Also worthy of note on the M1 Garand:
They make a replacement adjustable gas plug nowadays, that allows you to open the gas port all the way, fire a round. It won't cycle the action yet. Tighten it a turn and fire it again. It still won't cycle yet, but you repeat this process slowly, only until it cycles and ejects the brass without issues. If you then stick to the same brand ammo for a whole, your usually OK. If you change ammo and it doesn't cycle the bolt and eject the brass without issues, just a quick adjustment will cure the issue. Then stay with that brand fir a while.
This is something I learned back when I had my Garands, after it got a lot more expensive to get M2 Ball surplus ammo sometimes. I didn't shoot them much anyways, but having an option like an adjustable gas plug sure does add a lot of options to the table. That's just an FYI and my two cents worth, hope it helps.

 

[Cyrano4747]

Now if your concern is proce per round.....well.....welcome to the world of 'large caliber centerfire'. The norm is now .75 to 2.50 a round.

This right here is why reloading makes a lot of sense if you're into old guns, especially if they're calibers that aren't commonly stocked at your local sporting good store. If you're halfway competent at all you can make much nicer ammo than many factory loads, but even setting that aside the savings can be significant. I calculate break-even on all of the rounds I am thinking of loading to see if it's worth my time. I've never made the math make sense on something like 9mm, but something like7mm mauser is pretty quick to pay off. Get far enough out in the weeds and there are rounds that will pay for the dies in a single box of ammo.