Heat treating Mauser receivers
littlebill
I was reading thru the Kuhnhausen Mauser shop manual, and he suggests
re-heat treating
turn of the century actions, because they may be soft.
Any idea who does this, and what it costs? I don't intend to re-build any
mausers, just
curious who offers the service. Would it help those soft '93 spanish
actions, that were re-
barreled to 308 CETME, or is the steel to poor quality to salvage?
Thanks,
Bill
------------------------------------------------------------
Learn about rec.guns at http://www.recguns.net
Win an M1 Garand from Fulton Armory while helping the Cause!
Details of the MPFO rifle raffle are at http://myguns.org/
------------------------------------------------------------
Tom S.
# Hi -
#
# I was reading thru the Kuhnhausen Mauser shop manual, and he suggests
# re-heat treating
# turn of the century actions, because they may be soft.
#
# Any idea who does this, and what it costs? I don't intend to re-build any
# mausers, just
# curious who offers the service. Would it help those soft '93 spanish
# actions, that were re-
# barreled to 308 CETME, or is the steel to poor quality to salvage?
#
I don't know about heat treating, but you might consider this:
sta...@prolynx.com
# re-heat treating
# turn of the century actions, because they may be soft.
#
# Any idea who does this, and what it costs? �I don't intend to re-build any
# mausers, just
# curious who offers the service. �Would it help those soft '93 spanish
# actions, that were re-
#
# Thanks,
# Bill
#
It would be a neat trick, a lot of them were soft lower-carbon steel
that was case-hardened, Springfields and Krags were made that way,
too. Hardening doesn't add any strength to the steel, just resistance
to deformation. Unless you've got the knowledge and equipment to do
it yourself, I don't see anybody offering this service to the general
public due to liability concerns. Screw up and you end up with a
receiver like one of those low-number Springfields that could be
busted with just a tap on the rails.
And early Mausers just didn't have the safety features that the later
ones did. No gas handling, no safety lug, no firing pin interlock, a
bunch of other little items that were added to the '98s. Early ones
should be left as-is, IMO.
We've gone into the economics of "sporterizing" surplus these days in
past posts. By the time you factor in heat-treating, you could
probably buy several rifles new.
Stan
Bluehawk99
strengthening or softening...depending on the type of metal and
technique used.
clarkm...@gmail.com
...the Kuhnhausen Mauser shop manual ..
The editor must have been asleep at the switch on THAT book.
Scatter brained typed up lectures without the diagrams and qualifiers.
Still, it has some useful info buried that must be taken with
skepticism.
It beats "All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy" typed over and
over or Ayoob's make it up the night before writing.
The worst part of the book is the heat treat stuff.
I can imagine the lectures included qualifiers like, "And each time
you send it to the heat treat shop, you get wholesale - retail mark up
on the service and shipping, as well as another excuse why the
gunsmithing is not done yet."
penultimate
# And early Mausers just didn't have the safety features that the
later
# ones did. �No gas handling, no safety lug, no firing pin interlock,
a
# bunch of other little items that were added to the '98s. �Early ones
# should be left as-is, IMO.
Stan is exactly right. And here is my 2 cents worth.
And, of course, the "large ring" 98 receiver is, well, "larger" in
diameter as an added safety factor in consideration of Mauser's
recognition that steel of the era was not of predictably consistent
quality and metalurgy, especially in consideration of then new and
inconsistent smokeless powder formulations that then delivered
pressures far beyond the range of previous practical experience
(though much lower than is the case with "modern" loads in "modern"
rifles built with "contemporary" steel formulations and highly
controlled steel making processes.
"Problems" in 1890's steel formulations derived from 1890's ores and
steel-making processes were not just "softness." They included
inconsistent and spot-to-spot variation in alloying (including carbon
content) and spot inclusions. And, if a defect was not visually
obvious, the effective test method was a proof-load. It is no
accident that Germany adopted a manditory proof law in 1891 and that
Mauser, in light of proof failures in civilian arms (and field
failures in military arms) went to the large ring configuration with
the 98. A little more steel in the receiver ring was cheaper than
living with the steel failures that might otherwise be revealed.
It is also no accident and not just chauvisim that Sweden to REQUIRED
their Mausers (small ring) be made exclusively with Swedish steel from
particular Swedish sourced iron ore. If you read technical literature
regarding steel published in the 1890's or earlier (which you can read
in Google books), you will discover that Swedish steel was then
considered the best in the world. You will further that Swedish iron
ore was used to make the ordinance steel in much of English "best"
production from 1860 or so through the 1920s. The steel might have
been made in Birmingham but the ore came from Sweden. Krupp in
Germany used Swedish ore for its "branded" ordinance steel. Practical
engineering texts of the era considered ore source to be a big factor
(possibly the major one) in steel engineering properties and
consistency.
My reading of the history of steel and steel making with regard to
"modern" (meaning post-1860 good quality metalic cartridge) rifles
firearms suggests that you are wise to know the steel source (and
knowingly adjust pressures accordingly) for pre-WWI era rifles in
otherwise good condition. This is especially important for Pre-1900
(or so) rifles designed for a smokeless powder cartridge. Even with
the good stuff (e.g., a Swedish Mauser as a military example), I try
to keep max loads at or beneath the 40,000 psi range. Anybody that
advises otherwise really is assuming a modest risk to no obvious
advantage. And you may note that in this era it took American
firearms manufacturers a few years to get the steel more or less up to
the demands of smokeless powder pressures. For anything built before
1920, it pays to be aware of maker, model, and, in some cases, serial
number.
Generally factory load pressures (up to 50,000 PSI or so) for good
quality rifles produced between WWI and WWII I consider OK (and
entirely adequate), By this era, you could pretty much count on the
steel being used being up to the by then clearly understood
requirements of then current cartridge pressures. Steel making
processes had been well enough engineered by then to meet fairly
consistent quality standards without so much concern about where the
ore came from. At least I think this if the rifle is still chambered
as originally issued. If for no other reason than respect, I would
never shoot a book max load in a rifle from this era. And quite
frankly, I think that somebody that might build a modern rifle on even
a M98 version Turkish Mauser receiver (of dubious or at least
unpredictable and unknown steel quality), thinking it might somehow be
the equal of a current generation receiver, is being pretty stupid.
This is especially the case if they plan a cartridge or loads
approaching the 60,000 psi level.
Post WWII steel in a "good" receiver and barrel and aware load work-up
procedures I would trust with a maximum book load. Much of this is
"opinion" is that by the 1950's processes were such that adjacent bits
of steel likely had identical properties and that steel from two
different sources (but "made" to the same specifications) in reality
really were the same.
Gunner Asch
<drw...@cimtel.net> wrote:
> ...
Very very well stated and written.
Kudos and bravo!
Gunner Asch
clarkm...@gmail.com
�And quite
# frankly, I think that somebody that might build a modern rifle on even
# a M98 version Turkish Mauser receiver (of dubious or at least
# unpredictable and unknown steel quality), thinking it might somehow be
# the equal of a current generation receiver, is being pretty stupid.
# This is especially the case if they plan a cartridge or loads
# approaching the 60,000 psi level.
I must be pretty stupid, because over the last 44 years [but mostly
over the last 10 years] I have been sporterizing Mausers, and I push
any M98 to the limit of the 1989 Mauser size case head with large
Boxer primer pocket to the limit of the brass ~ 65,000 psi.
I especially like the 1903 Turkish Mauser [Oberndorf].
The VZ24s and 1908 Braz, I have converted to 7mmRem Mag and 300 Win
Mag, and I push to the limit of those case heads ~ 70kpsi.
The limit to the Mauser case head with Large Boxer primer, like the
243, 30-06, etc, is the primer pocket getting loose.
With the same case head in small rifle primers [like 6mmBR], the
pressure can go much higher before the primer pierces.
David R.Birch
OTOH, if I pushed the same hot loads regularly through my guns like
you like to, I'd check headspace before and after every shoot.
David
TimR
<clarkmagnu...@gmail.com>
> ...
In reheating a complex machined part like those, I'd expect to have
problems with warping. I don't have any experience heat treating
rifle parts, but I've seen it happen with other machined parts.
penultimate
Perhaps you do not realize there were Mausers made FOR Turkey and
Mausers made IN Turkey.
If you have sufficient good sense and the expertise to select the
Obendorf and VZ (or other highly advanced arms manufacturer) produced
receivers that may have been employed by Turkey, you are probably OK.
The steel in them was made by people that knew what made good stuff
and that were as skilled as any of the time in producing it. Further,
any which might easily blow up because of a hidden inclusion defect in
the steel probably already did when last fired decades ago. So time
and God have added some quality control to Paul Mauser's K98 receiver
safety factor. But, in any event, the two "Turks" you mention were
Mausers made FOR Turkey that are no better or worse than similar
production FOR other countries.
But, as the biggest example of where Turks can be a problem, many of
the Turks on the market were Turkish production (including bolts,
barrels, and receivers made from scratch in Turkey) during the early
stages of WWII or rework from heterogeneous new and used Mauser parts
up to 50 years old AT THE TIME. Most, but not all, of these are
marked "K Hale." In many, but not all, instances where old parts were
reused, pre-existing marks remain visible. Generically, this odd lot
of "Turks" is referred to as the M38, not as a unique Mauser model,
but as an external configuration standard to which old Mausers on hand
in Turkey were rebuilt and new Mausers constructed. Most of the cheap
stuff on the street today is "M38" because, minimally, it went through
the M38 configuration standardization process. A fair percentage of K
Hale marked rifles have K Hale produced receivers. A fair percentage
of these rifles never left the arsenal after production/rework until
they were offered on the surplus market. My point here is that the
better a Turkish receiver looks, the less likely it has been through
God's quality control process. And, in 1940 Turkey was neither a
world-class ordinance steel producer nor had ready access to quality
steel from other sources.
I have been assured by a gunsmith/custom rifle builder of established
merit that I am certain understands metals and metallurgy better than
most that Turkish PRODUCED receivers are not a good choice for
building a custom rifle because steel quality is inconsistent and can
not be relied upon. He will not build a rifle on one even if you are
willing to pay him to do so. He will use a VZ, FN, or pre 1941 German
produced surplus K-98 receiver - if this is what you want and if you
are willing to pay for the work required to achieve his mechanical and
metal finish standards working from a surplus receiver.
He gladly points out that you can start with a complete Dakota Arms
action (or other quite expensive limited production Mauser-based
actions) for less! At the time, he recommended a most cost-effective
route starting with a Mark-X action because the modern steel was good
and usually only minimal labor was required to achieve custom-quality
finish and function. Unless by "custom rifle" you mean slapping on a
new barrel, cutting a chamber and maybe fitting an aftermarket stock
blank, and even then you value your time very cheaply, if at all,
today using a surplus Mauser receiver makes no economic sense at all.
This approach is best described as spending $500 (or more) to convert
a $200 plus military artifact into a $150 ugly sporter that most
likely is no better than a slightly tuned $400 factory gun still worth
$400.
I have no way of knowing whether your knowledge of "Turks" includes
this awareness - it seems it ought to. But certainly that of many
that read posts here does not. And without such awareness your posts
IMO verge on dangerous advice. When you are pushing the limits, the
details matter. In the case of "Turks" that includes knowing who
built the rifle in question an when.
More generally, if you "advise" pushing the limits on loads using 100
year old Mauser receivers based on "experience", I certainly hope that
experience includes having built 10,000 or such more custom rifles and
shooting lots of hot loads in each without a single failure and/or
some very serious engineering education that includes understanding of
metal fatigue as the elastic limits of hoop strength are approached
time and time again. Experience of this general type and level is
what is required qualify the "advice" you offer on this topic as
lawyer-resistant. As Forest Gump would say, "stupid is as stupid
does." Anything having to do with "stupid", I will leave to the jury.
It is my opinion, however,that you have been lucky for 44 years doing
something that at face values seems to me silly. I see no point today
to shooting 65,000 psi loads in rifles where the key piece approaches
a century old in the first place! I can do everything I want to do
with a 80 or 100 year old Mauser in its original configuration and
chambering with a 40,000 PSI load. And probably what I can do is not
meaningfully different than you can accomplish at 65,000 PSI. And
before you get into any kind of argument about whether or not I am
"qualified" to offer my position, you might consider that when the
mission boils down to fooling around, being a genius is not required
when advising sensible and justified caution. I don't know my
recommended loads will never cause a catastrophic and possibly
dangerous failure in any firearm. But I am absolutely sure that my
recommendations are safer than yours!
Bluehawk99
I have a .458 Win Mag built on a 1944 Czech VZ24 action that I have
full confidence in and I don't consider myself stupid!
I also have a Turk Mauser rebarrelled in 7.62x39mm that I feel
perfectly safe with...where is the stupidity in that?
Both generate in excess of 50,000 CUP!
clarkm...@gmail.com
Google groups search in rec.guns will show 20 hits for my posts that
contain "hoop stress".
This picture, that I took of brass that came out of a K.Kale that I
rebarreled, has been downloaded more than 10,000 times over the last
10 years:
http://home.comcast.net/~c.magnuson/dscf0032bulletpinch308brass243chambercroppedtwice.jpg
My father is the great gun designer, but my son and I are also
engineers.
My son and I have a running joke.
We heard a union organizer complaining about capitalism, but was
questioned by a person with his personal success story.
The union organizer brayed at him, "You got lucky!"
So when either my son or I out does the other, the reaction is feign
discounting the accomplishment by yelling, "YOU GOT LUCKY!
Clark
Gunner Asch
<clarkm...@gmail.com> wrote:
#
#Google groups search in rec.guns will show 20 hits for my posts that
#contain "hoop stress".
#
#This picture, that I took of brass that came out of a K.Kale that I
#rebarreled, has been downloaded more than 10,000 times over the last
#10 years:
#http://home.comcast.net/~c.magnuson/dscf0032bulletpinch308brass243chambercroppedtwice.jpg
#
#My father is the great gun designer, but my son and I are also
#engineers.
While some of Clarks experiments and standards tend to make my teeth
itch...His contributions to handloading and firearms pressure testing
have been gratefully read and contimplated over many many years.
We have never met..but I consider him a very intelligent friend.
And he comes up with some of the damnedest experiments..and even more
interesting results!!
Dont be blowing Clark off...he has probably fired more weapons at max
pressures..and beyond..than anyone here.
Gunner
"I am for doing good to the poor, but I differ in opinion of the
means. I think the best way of doing good to the poor, is not
making them easy in poverty, but leading or driving them out of
it. In my youth I travelled much, and I observed in different
countries, that the more public provisions were made for the
poor the less they provided for themselves, and of course became
poorer. And, on the contrary, the less was done for them, the
more they did for themselves, and became richer." -- Benjamin
Franklin, /The Encouragement of Idleness/, 1766
Tony W
# My father is the great gun designer, but my son and I are also
# engineers.
# My son and I have a running joke.
# We heard a union organizer complaining about capitalism, but was
# questioned by a person with his personal success story.
# The union organizer brayed at him, "You got lucky!"
# So when either my son or I out does the other, the reaction is feign
# discounting the accomplishment by yelling, "YOU GOT LUCKY!
# Clark
What do you think of cryogenic treating of parts. I've heard opinions
from so called experts going both directions?
BTW, I have a 1909 Berlin made Argentine Mauser that I rebarreled to
.308 Winchester. It's my favorite hunting rifle and now I'm a bit less
concerned about shooting it.
Tony
David R.Birch
The 7.65x53.5 Mauser round is very similar to the 7.62x51 round the
.308Win is based on. You should have no problems as long as you don't
try to overstress it with "pushing the limits" handloads like Clark
needs to shoot.
David
penultimate
Reading your posts over the years has caused me to consider you a
contributer far more informed than most and historically the only
issue in your content that has caused me great concern is your
advocacy of very hot loads - loads that I would consider approaching a
danger point if used in the wrong firearm by the unknowing. I am also
one that has never seen any worthwhile benefit of an extra 50 or 100
fps (or even a bit more) - unless that correlates with significant
accuracy improvement - and even less when trying for a little extra
velocity adds one iota of risk. One reason is that I am no more
inclined to wear safety glasses for my most often single shot when
hunting than I am earmuffs - even though I wear both religiously at
the range. So why on earth would I want to work up or use a load that
risks blowing a primer in the field? And if I am using the load to
punch holes in paper, why should I give a squat about a little extra
velocity? I would guess on this topic we suffer core and
irreconciable differences, not the least of which is in my shoes I
consider your advocacy in a public forum to be irresponsible.
That said, I did the googling you advised and see to your credit that
you have delved into the engineering issues surrounding our bone of
contention and that I probably should either have done this before
writing a couple of my sentences or simply assumed that you were aware
of the issues. I should have been more respectful of your prior
effort, particularly since I consider most of your contributions
worthy of respect.
In my googling, I have learned a bit that I did not know. But I also
note that a preponderance of posts from apparently knowledgeable types
correspond to my information and beliefs and that you seem to have
walked away in conflict from the most authoritative post or two (from
people professionally trained on and working in the subject matter) on
pressure and metal fatigue. And I am probably now a bit more
concerned about metal fatigue bolt lugs than the receiver. But earlier
I said you "got lucky" before without thinking about it in quickly
dashing off my reply. After a couple of hours of reading and thinking
about the topic at hand, I really, really, think that luck has been on
your side. But, I claim absolutely no experience pushing the limits
in a handload, have only used a hammer to open a bolt once (with a
Remington factory load in 270 WSM!) and have absolutely no plans to
engage in such effort in the future. So God bless in your efforts -
even if I don't think they justify your conclusions. And I am sure
the powder companies are ever so grateful.
A couple of words about your very own "K Kale" experience that
apparently you think counters what I said previously.
Are the bolt and receiver in same in fact Turkish PRODUCTION vintage
late 30's to early 40's (where I suggest the steel of is dubious
quality, based on claims from someone whose expertise is entirely
credible to me) or reworked parts from Czech or German production
(where the steel is as good any found in Mausers). This does make a
difference to the point you are trying apparently to make and K Hale
marks appear on both.
When you answer, tell me how you know because there may well be a
subtle machining detail of which I am unaware and I would like to
know. My point is that a K Hale marked M38 may well have VZ (or
other non K Hale) receiver and/or bolt, a fact that is only obvious if
prior markings have NOT been completely polished away in the M38
rework. If so, your experience does confirm VZ (or whoever) made a
pretty good unit - something which conforms with what most people that
know about Mausers would agree is true. But it stands in opposition
to my only point regarding Turks -- that the steel in K Hale produced
parts is iffy -- only if you are sure that the receiver and bolt are K
Hale production. The barrel we know is from somebody else because you
told us.
That said, thanks for the nice picture showing us what grotesque
pressure signs look like when somebody stuffs way to much powder in a
reformed 308 case, but I am left wondering how the picture being
downloaded 10,000 times speaks to the issue at hand?
Maybe a 100% Turkish made K Hale Mauser which survived being fired
10,000 times with loads that blow out primers is a pretty interesting
data point and in my first hasty read, that is what I saw. But I
don't think that is what you are implying was done when you say the
pictue was downloaded that many times. At the moment all you I can
assume is that you own a rifle made of mystery components that is
marked K Hale and that you fired three progressively hotter "hot
loads" in this rifle. Probably there is more to it. But not that I
can glean.
My original post had two main points:
1. We learned how to reliably make good steel in quantity in fits and
starts during the same period of time the modern cartridge rifle was
developed. The development of both were very much in tandem and you
are not well equipped to understand firearms history without some
understanding of steel making.
2. If you are one that wants to mark the Mauser 98 as essentially the
high point of modern bolt action rifle design, you would be wise to
remember that steel formulation types and quality levels taken for
granted today as specification standards were really not widely
available from multiple sources until 1950 or so.
Why anyone would think all Mauser 98s (produced over a fifty year
period in myriad factories in several countries) are equally strong
(and that the differences do not matter) is beyond my grasp.
My father's troop ship somewhere off Okinawa awaiting the invasion of
Japan set sail toward California shortly after the Japanese
surrendered. Two days later it turned around. His combat engineering
battalion was given the honor and privilege of sailing to Korea to
serve for six more months in the initial occupation contingent. He
found even less to like in Korea than France when he arrived at
Normandy a few days after D-Day. In France, at least, the wine was
good and the field didn't smell. But the net of going to Korea was
that he was treated as something of an expert a few years later when
the Communists revealed they were no longer our good buddies.
He opined at the time that it required something like $60,000 in
munitions per German or Japanese soldier killed and that there was no
good reason he could think of why killing a Korean (or Chinese) commie
would prove any cheaper. This was a lot of money in 1951 when a new
factory bolt action cost about 50 times what a gunsmith made in an
hour - if you could get your hands on a new Winchester. He suggested
we offer the North Koreans a mere $10,000 each to surrender. This, he
said, was enough to leave a few thousand to invest even after laying
in enough rice and kimchee for several generations. Eating well and
ontemplating how to make their nest egg grow, he was convinced would
make all the Commies would self convert. We would save a bundle and
the red menace would be over.
So, the next time somebody says you "got lucky", make a difference and
give them a few bucks.
Tony W
# The 7.65x53.5 Mauser round is very similar to the 7.62x51 round the
# .308Win is based on. You should have no problems as long as you don't
# try to overstress it with "pushing the limits" handloads like Clark
# needs to shoot.
Most of .308 my hand loads are a bit on the light side. If I need more
power, I'll bring out my M70 Winchester .30-06... I don't hunt anything
that needs more power than that.
Tony
clarkm...@gmail.com
# What do you think of cryogenic treating of parts. �I've heard opinions
# from so called experts going both directions?
#
# BTW, I have a 1909 Berlin made Argentine Mauser that I rebarreled to
# .308 Winchester. �It's my favorite hunting rifle and now I'm a bit less
# concerned about shooting it.
#
# Tony
Tony,
I am a big advocate of stress relieved and factory lapped barrels.
But that is heat, and of cold relieved, all I know is what I read on
the internet.
http://www.riflebarrels.com/faq_lilja_rifle_barrels.htm#deepcryogenic
There are good ways to get a 1909 Arg Mauser; 1) inherit one, 2)
marry into one, or 3) buy one from someone who does not know what it
is worth.
I did it the wrong way. Someone asked me to load ammo and sight it in.
I shot the 35 Whelen into little clover leaf groups. Now it is gone,
and I miss it.
Clark
clarkm...@gmail.com
So why on earth would I want to work up or use a load that
In strong rifles I like to work up a load to the point of trouble, and
back off a 6% powder charge safety margin, ala Vernon Speer 1956.
The way to not have a primer fail when hunting is to know where the
threshold of primer failure is in that rifle.
I made money in the 1990s designing switching power supplies,
disabling protection, overloading to the point of explosion, changing
the design to beef up where that failure occurred, over load it even
higher....etc.
The competition put a population of their design in the oven and
waited for the bathtub shaped curve of predicted wear out failures.
I could make a better design faster and cheaper. Now consultants may
pitch highly accelerated stress test (HAST) for power design, but
often just raise the temp, rather than blow up the design with a power
overload. No explosions, not much learned.
So when I started handloading ~1999, the first thing I did was try to
overload 9mm pistols to failure.
Since then I have been overloading 19 Badger, .223, .243, 25acp, 257
Roberts AI, 260, 270, 7mmRemMag, 32acp, 32sw, 32S&WLong, 32-20,
7.62x25mm, 7.62x39mm , 308, 7.62x54R, 8x57mm, .380, 9x19mm, 9x23mm,
357 Sig, 38 sp, 357 mag, 38sw, 40sw, 10mm, 10.4mm, 45acp, 45Colt, .
410, and 45/70.
I may not, for each cartridge, have spread sheet filling with hundreds
of hours of data and boxes of spare parts, like I have for 9mm, but I
some data on each.
#you seem to have
# walked away in conflict from the most authoritative post or two (from
# people professionally trained on and working in the subject matter) on
# pressure and metal fatigue.
I don't know the thread(s), but it may have been because I knew
nothing of metal fatigue or I failed to come back and read more of the
thread.
~ 5 years ago I did not walk away and another engineer on the internet
[I asked politely despite his frustration over my ignorance] made this
graph for me of his metal fatigue analysis of his Rem700 bolt:
http://www.jonaadland.com/SN.jpg
The curious thing was that there is no endurance limit for Aluminum.
The jet you fly in would fall out of the sky when the wings wear out
from metal fatigue.
# Are the bolt and receiver in same in fact Turkish PRODUCTION vintage
# late 30's to early 40's (where I suggest the steel of is dubious
# quality, based on claims from someone whose expertise is entirely
# credible to me) or reworked parts from Czech or German production
# (where the steel is as good any found in Mausers).
That may take a while. I know where it is, sort of. It looks like an
episode of "Hoarders", crammed into a storage unit.
Remember what the psychiatrists say, "You promised that you would;
sort, throw away, and put away."
But on rec.guns, our motto about guns is, "Buy'em all."
#
# That said, thanks for the nice picture showing us what grotesque
# pressure signs look like when somebody stuffs way to much powder in a
# reformed 308 case, but I am left wondering how the picture being
# downloaded 10,000 times speaks to the issue at hand?
It may be singular, but it is a contact with reality.
# He opined at the time that it required something like $60,000 in
# munitions per German or Japanese soldier killed and that there was no
# good reason he could think of why killing a Korean (or Chinese) commie
# would prove any cheaper. This was a lot of money in 1951 when a new
# factory bolt action cost about 50 times what a gunsmith made in an
# hour - if you could get your hands on a new Winchester. He suggested
# we offer the North Koreans a mere $10,000 each to surrender. This, he
# said, was enough to leave a few thousand to invest even after laying
# in enough rice and kimchee for several generations. Eating well and
# ontemplating how to make their nest egg grow, he was convinced would
# make all the Commies would self convert. We would save a bundle and
# the red menace would be over.
I keep telling myself that there are a million ways to look at
anything.
When I was 5 years and 2 moths old, I could not figure out how the
water knew to push up on my inner tube when it had air, not to push up
when there was no air in the tube. How did the water know the air was
in there, if the water could not touch the air?
Now at age 58, I understand that problem in terms of gravity and
density, and the model works so well, I am satisfied.
We like models that let us use our calculators to consistently
predict the future.
"The Great Reckoning" states that the size of an empire is the result
of the cost to project power divided by the cost to defend against it.
Their example is that the size of the British empire grew when they
had machine guns and others did not. The Empire shrunk when the others
got machine guns too.
I have spent too much time arguing how to model trust or expectancy.
The convenient point of picking off the data is where money is spent.
I recently figured out that if I only pay $10/day in gas tax and WA
freeway construction cost $6k/foot of lane, then my payments only pay
5% interest on enough space for me to sit in a traffic jam.
What does it all mean?
It is a fantasy come true, to have weapon's effectiveness measured in
commies/buck.
Clark
D. Staples
David R.Birch
# OK, how about an 1891 Argentine by Loewe? Very good shape, full rifle.
The Loewe mark means it was made before 1897 as 1896 was when that
mark was last used. This is a much weaker action than the 1909
Argentine and used a load with a slow heavy round nose bullet. NOT a
candidate for rebarrelling to a modern cartridge and the little bit of
surplus ammo I've seen for it is higher pressure for the later rifles.
David
T.Alan Kraus
I built a very accurate, sweet shooting .257 Roberts on a 1891 Lowe,
No regrets.
cheers
T.Alan
David R.Birch
# I built a very accurate, sweet shooting .257 Roberts on a 1891 Lowe,
# No regrets.
#
# cheers
# T.Alan
I recommend that you check headspace often, preferably before and
after each shooting session. The '91 action has none of the safety
features of the '98 to provide for case or bolt lug failure.
David
Doug T
level loads to shoot in a 32Mag S&W model 16. :(
Doug T