PDA

View Full Version : Spanish .308 Mauser carbine


12v71
July 04, 2015, 20:27
I just picked up a Spanish Mauser carbine... Cheap. The seller thinks it may be an early "engineer's carbine" My question is, is this thing safe with commercial .308, or does it need to be loaded down to .308 cetme specs? Some other sites I've looked at say handload only, others say no problem. So I'm kind of confused, What say you guys in my home site? Don't have it home yet so I cant really give much info on markings, etc.

Appreciate any input. Thanks.

tdb59
July 04, 2015, 20:31
Can not say until you have it in hand and can give more specifics.






.

12v71
July 04, 2015, 20:45
Pretty much what I thought, I should have some info by next weekend. It was cheap enough I can use it as a decoration piece and not feel bad.

308/223shooter
July 04, 2015, 23:07
If it's a '93 action with a small ring receiver, I'd not fire commercial .308.
A lot of those old mausers have been converted, and not safe to fire. If it has a large ring receiver, it should be fine.

J. Armstrong
July 05, 2015, 07:36
If it's a '93 action with a small ring receiver, I'd not fire commercial .308.
A lot of those old mausers have been converted, and not safe to fire. If it has a large ring receiver, it should be fine.

This was my understanding as well. FR7 = small ring, FR8 = large ring.

jdmcomp
July 05, 2015, 08:42
There was a CETME round which is the same dimensions as the 308 but was loaded with lighter bullets and less powder. It was used in the A models and may have been used in this carbine. Do not fire modern 308/7.62 loads in this rifle.

12v71
July 05, 2015, 12:31
For some reason I'm pretty sure it's a small ring action. Been looking on the net for load info, so far came up with a 110-115 bullet at 2450 fps.
It's kind of strange the number of people that insist .308 is safe in this rifle, myself... I would just as soon not push it.

308/223shooter
July 05, 2015, 13:46
I had one of the '93 action Spanish Mausers, thing was like new. After less than 50 rounds of Port surplus, I began to have head space issues. Found the head space had increased enough the bold closed on a no-go, when it would not when I first checked it upon purchase.
Sold it to a mate with the understanding that he was well aware of the problem. A FR-8 is safe for 7.62 NATO, not so sure about the FR-7. When you get it, check the bottom of the bolt face to see if it's flat. That'll tell you right there not to shoot .308 in it.

fnogger
July 05, 2015, 14:00
I'd turn it into a DeLisle like carbine ....

308/223shooter
July 05, 2015, 15:19
I'd turn it into a DeLisle like carbine ....

Now that'd be cool.

SAFN49
July 05, 2015, 21:54
For some reason I'm pretty sure it's a small ring action. Been looking on the net for load info, so far came up with a 110-115 bullet at 2450 fps.
It's kind of strange the number of people that insist .308 is safe in this rifle, myself... I would just as soon not push it.

All of Norma test actions are small rings. Small rings can handle the pressure using good steel. Spanish steel, not so good.

There is a wealth of information on small ring Mausers, Spanish, and heat treat on the internet. I have had/shot at least a dozen Spanish Mausers. I have had ZERO issues shooting NATO ammo from them. I have not had, or shot a Spanish that has had the chamber insert. Stay away from the ones with chamber inserts. Just sayin

randy762ak
July 05, 2015, 22:16
One would think That if said small ring Spanish Mauser actions rebarreled to 308/7.62x51 were to be weak and fail we would have it all over the internet >?? Like the weak low number 1903's and Eddystone M-17's How many have you actually heard of going POP-- I have several with shot out barrels !
That said I have several FR-7's and a 1916 small ring converted to 308 and I use starting Load data reduced 10% Better yet --CAST boolets Baby and they are like a dream to shoot cast through !:love:

tdb59
July 05, 2015, 22:26
The issue is not that they fail catastrophically, it is that the bolt lugs tend to set back into the receiver, creating excess headspace, and very difficult manipulation.
Being as the model 1893 and 1895 actions were shallow case hardened, repair from setback is cost prohibitive.

The real downside to these actions is poor handling of vented gasses from a pierced primer or case separation ( see above ).
A jet of shart travels back along the left bolt raceway, and there is no flange on the bolt shroud as on the Model 1898.


A blast in the face is not my idea of a good time.

You may disagree.


.

12v71
July 05, 2015, 23:36
This^^ is pretty much what I have read today regarding the FR7 type. If that's what I end up with... time to duplicate the CETME load. No big deal, I would just as soon not destroy the toy.:eek:

fnogger
July 06, 2015, 10:21
Now that'd be cool.

Indeed. Rhineland Arms used to sell a kit - barrel and 1911 mag adapter....

bigstick61
July 06, 2015, 22:25
In spite of all of the rumours flying about the Internet for all of these years, the FR-7 is capable of handling 7.62 NATO ammo and was meant to use it post-conversion. No 7.62mm Spanish Mauser was ever intended to principally use the 7.62 CETME round. The pressures between the two cartridges are almost identical, anyways.

12v71
July 07, 2015, 00:00
In spite of all of the rumours flying about the Internet for all of these years, the FR-7 is capable of handling 7.62 NATO ammo and was meant to use it post-conversion. No 7.62mm Spanish Mauser was ever intended to principally use the 7.62 CETME round. The pressures between the two cartridges are almost identical, anyways.

Umm. No the pressures are not the same. And yes, the FR-7 can handle NATO pressures... but for how long? this seems to be running 50/50 on yes you can. And no you shouldn't. Pretty much what I've read elsewhere..:rolleyes: I would rather be safe than sorry for now.

bigstick61
July 10, 2015, 02:43
Umm. No the pressures are not the same. And yes, the FR-7 can handle NATO pressures... but for how long? this seems to be running 50/50 on yes you can. And no you shouldn't. Pretty much what I've read elsewhere..:rolleyes: I would rather be safe than sorry for now.

Have you seen the cartridge specs as published by the Spanish military? They all show either an insignificant difference in chamber pressure or none at all. The CETME cartridge uses a faster burning powder which gives it a higher pressure relative to the external ballistics in order to efficiently drive the lighter bullet of the CETME cartridge.

The Spanish Army's 1986 manual for the FR-8 lists the two cartridges as having the following pressures:

-CETME: 3,300 kg/cm2
-NATO: 3,500 kg/cm2

The treatise on cartridges published by the Santa Barbara arsenal (Tratado de Cartucheria by Colonel Francisco Lanza Gutierrez) shows both cartridges as having a maximum chamber pressure of 3,500 kg/cm2.

The CETME is described as having a charge of 25 grains of degressive burning, single-base flake powder and the NATO as having a charge of 46 grains of a progressive burning, single-bases extruded powder.

The FR-7s action is quite capable of handling the NATO loads, but lacks some of the safety features found in later Mauser types, which can be an issue even with lighter-pressure loads (such as a case failure; the gasses would not be diverted sufficiently).

tywest
July 10, 2015, 16:31
Im not going to expound on the issue as i dont want to type a paper on the subject but the short of it through study, examination, and testing is that spanish soft steel is myth in the small ring mausers, the small ring can handle nato, they were converted for nato 7.62 not cetme csp, and commercial .308 is to be avoided.

I have only legitimately seen one rifle fail at the reciever.....one and it was well used and abused all the others were hearsay or forced failure.

bigstick61
July 11, 2015, 02:59
Im not going to expound on the issue as i dont want to type a paper on the subject but the short of it through study, examination, and testing is that spanish soft steel is myth in the small ring mausers, the small ring can handle nato, they were converted for nato 7.62 not cetme csp, and commercial .308 is to be avoided.

I have only legitimately seen one rifle fail at the reciever.....one and it was well used and abused all the others were hearsay or forced failure.

Wasn't the idea that there's a substantial difference between equivalent commercial and military 7.62mm loads also debunked a while back? I recall reading a paper about that a few years ago relating to the differing methods of measuring pressure used for commercial and military purposes.

I would imagine reasonably equivalent commercial loads should be fine. I wouldn't recommend shooting the "light magnum" loads or anything like that, but standard 150 grain ammo should be fine.

12v71
July 14, 2015, 22:45
FWIW, I picked it up yesterday. It's actually an M1916 civil guard model, has a gas vent hole on the left side and a serial of 220,xxx. Any thoughts on this?

308/223shooter
July 14, 2015, 23:09
FWIW, I picked it up yesterday. It's actually an M1916 civil guard model, has a gas vent hole on the left side and a serial of 220,xxx. Any thoughts on this?

Do the serials match? Could be a nice collectable for the safe.

12v71
July 14, 2015, 23:27
Do the serials match? Could be a nice collectable for the safe.

Actually they all do. Wood and finish seem to be in very good condition too, a few nicks and dings but seems to be honest use. the bent bolt on these is a bit of a plus, not that I would scope it. It just stays out of the way. Not bad for cheap.:)

MJ1
July 15, 2015, 11:13
Not the best post for speculation without a picture at any price when talking about safety. If the rifle in question is so nice sell it and get a large ring FR-8 and avoid the drama.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v130/montereyjack/bkt005a_zps43d7d170.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v130/montereyjack/faf6745b.jpg

Good luck and be safe

308/223shooter
July 15, 2015, 14:13
Actually they all do. Wood and finish seem to be in very good condition too, a few nicks and dings but seems to be honest use. the bent bolt on these is a bit of a plus, not that I would scope it. It just stays out of the way. Not bad for cheap.:)
If you bring it to Brushes place, I'll bring some Cetme manufactured ammo. I got it with my first FR-7.

bigstick61
July 15, 2015, 17:51
How do your trajectories match up with the FR-7 sights? The latter were calibrated for the 7.62mm NATO cartridge and not the 7.62mm CETME, so I've long been curious about how much they differ in that regard.

12v71
July 15, 2015, 19:39
If you bring it to Brushes place, I'll bring some Cetme manufactured ammo. I got it with my first FR-7.

"We" will be there. Appreciate the offer, and yes it is a small ring. Forgot to put that out above.

308/223shooter
July 15, 2015, 19:51
How do your trajectories match up with the FR-7 sights? The latter were calibrated for the 7.62mm NATO cartridge and not the 7.62mm CETME, so I've long been curious about how much they differ in that regard.

I never had the chance to shoot it beyond 100 yards, so I didn't notice any big difference between NATO surplus and the Cetme ammo that came with it. It's been quite a while since then, the most I remember was the hurt it put on my shoulder.
Oh, and muzzle blast. Remove the flash hider for some stellar powder flash at night. Really impresses the on lookers.

tywest
August 12, 2015, 22:29
How do your trajectories match up with the FR-7 sights? The latter were calibrated for the 7.62mm NATO cartridge and not the 7.62mm CETME, so I've long been curious about how much they differ in that regard.

Low and to the right for me

tywest
August 12, 2015, 22:30
Wasn't the idea that there's a substantial difference between equivalent commercial and military 7.62mm loads also debunked a while back? I recall reading a paper about that a few years ago relating to the differing methods of measuring pressure used for commercial and military purposes.

I would imagine reasonably equivalent commercial loads should be fine. I wouldn't recommend shooting the "light magnum" loads or anything like that, but standard 150 grain ammo should be fine.

Its a pretty big difference when your talking PSI and so is the headspace and case thickness

K. Funk
August 13, 2015, 10:38
I thought Hatcher did a lot of work with these. I think he found the action adequate, but the lack of a gas shield was the major concern. I am not an expert, so don't take my opinion to the bank.

krf

jugrunner
August 14, 2015, 07:37
put your "man panties" on .... they kick like a SOB .... been there, done that .... :wink:

HankC
August 21, 2015, 08:04
I had couple 1916s. Stiff to lift bolt handle when shooting 7.62x51, only shot German training ammo with it and it is fun. The 1893 is a nice platform to convert to 7.62x39!

STGThndr
August 21, 2015, 19:12
An old friend from years ago had an original, in good shape, 7mm Mauser. This was made before they made the 98's and chopped the other rifles in the attempt to use the NATO round. Quite possibly was used in the Civil War in the 1930's. Anyway it was a nice carbine and I wish I woulda bought it even tho it was 7mm. He used it for deer hunting in Colorado and it was effective. I was into .308 and 8mm at the time so didnt bid on it... The issue sights werent that great but then all Mausers came with funky sights...
Still have a Spanish 8mm "La Caruna" with a fine bore but lots of outside pitting... An old time gunsmith, A R Thomas, who hung out with Townsend Whelen and P O Ackley looked it over for me and said I should save my money and get something better as the Spanish steel was soft back then. Took his advice but still have that Spanish Mauser.