Mexican Mauser barrel thread?

Discussion in 'Gunsmithing' started by specweldtom, Aug 2, 2010.

  1. specweldtom

    specweldtom Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,066
    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2004
    I've got a used barrel reportedly taken off a small ring 98 Mexican Mauser. My pitch gage says it's a 13 tpi. Shouldn't it be a 12 tpi? The major thread diameter is .960". Should it be .980"? The barrel is not the original military barrel, and I don't know who made it.

    I know virtually nothing about small ring 98's, and didn't find anything in Ackley's handbooks.

    Thanks, Tom
     
  2. shortgrass

    shortgrass Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,993
    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2010
    1910 & 1936 Mexican Mauser '98,,,, .980"x 12t.p.i 55 deg. Whitworth. Model 1924 is 1.1"x 12t.p.i. 55 deg. Whitworth thread
     

  3. specweldtom

    specweldtom Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,066
    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2004
    Shortgrass, I got a look at the receiver the barrel came out of. It's marked 1941 and was made in Mexico City. I'm betting it's the 1936 model. The barrel to receiver thread fit was terrible. I think the barrel is unusable.

    Thanks very much for taking the time to help. I now know what it was supposed to be.

    Good hunting, Tom
     
  4. shortgrass

    shortgrass Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,993
    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2010
    Somebodys' 'doctored' it to suit themselves. Might be for something else. All three original models were made by FN. I wouldn't be surprised to learn some replacement parts were made in Mexico.
     
  5. specweldtom

    specweldtom Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,066
    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2004
    Yeah, I wish I had the chance to really examine it. The crest on the top of the receiver ring said something like "Fabrica de Armas Nacional Mexico DF around the Mexican eagle, with 1941 stamped at the bottom. No reference to FN. I looked for that. Just a serial # along the left side. No other markings I can remember.

    Shoot, I just snapped. The Germans took over FN in 1940, so it's unlikely they were making rifles for Mexico in 1941. This thing probably was made in Mexico?????

    I rechecked the barrel tenon thread. The pitch gage fits much better on 13 tpi than it does on 12. I'm wondering if someone pulled the wrong switch setting up to cut the threads. Is it possible that a thread fit could be so bad that a 13 pitch barrel thread would make up in a 12 pitch receiver. The short tenon only has about 5 threads. When I tried the barrel in the receiver, it flopped around, and would make up freely by hand.

    Since you were good enough to help me, I am passing along everything I have learned about it. It's academic now, because I can't use the barrel, and the receiver doesn't belong to me. (thank goodness)

    Think I'll stick with the large rings.

    Thanks again Shortgrass. Tom
     
  6. shortgrass

    shortgrass Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,993
    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2010
    Kind of like a "Mexican Chiang Kai-Shek"! Those original 'small ring' Mauser "98's were highly desirable for light weight customs when they were available. The Mexican & Peruvian '98's have been gone for a generation now. I think the thing to remember here is that they are Model 1898's in every sense, except the barrel thread (on the small rings). They have the "Mauser Collar", they do most of the firing pin retraction (cocking) as the bolt handle is lifted, have the 'saftey' third locking lug, the guide rib on the bolt body, and the 'gas' shield on the bolt shroud, all features the earlier model rifles didn't have. I just found some conflicting info that says the 1936 Short Rifle was made in The Goverment Arms factory in Mexico City, not by FN. It looks like , over the years that the Mauser '98 was the bolt rifle to have , Mexico imported rifles from Germany (DWM), Austria (Steyr), Czechoslovakia (CZ), and Belgium (FN) besides making their own (model 1936 & 1954).
     
    Last edited: Aug 4, 2010
  7. specweldtom

    specweldtom Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,066
    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2004
    Ted, all the info you've posted fits.

    I was asked by the owner (a good friend), if I would put a 6.5 x .284 barrel in this action. At first, I thought it would be O.K., but with what I've learned here and from looking at the action, I changed my mind. The 6.5 x .284 is a fairly fat, high pressure round. It doesn't look to me like the small ring has enough steel around the chamber to be safe with this cartridge. No science, just my opinion.

    I appreciate all your help. Tom
     
  8. shortgrass

    shortgrass Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,993
    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2010
    Small ring w/ small thread should probably be limited to 6.5x55, 7x57 class of cartridges. I've seem the 6.5-284 on Large Ring/large thread '98's. The two I've had come to my shop have had feeding problems and took some time to fix. There are some Large Ring/small thread rifles around (Turks). Some were made by DWM and some were made in Turkey if memory serves. One of those, in good shape, would be OK for .308 Win. class of cartridges I would think. I've built many rifles over the years using '98's,,,,, because I can do all the work myself. If you have to pay to have the work done there are better choices for actions to be considered. Also, my opinion is that a Mauser '98 makes a fine hunting rifle, but I don't think I'd build a target rifle using one. Again, more and better choices for such a project. Mausers that aren't a rusted/pitted piece of junk are getting harder to find,,, and the price is up, too.
     
    Last edited: Aug 4, 2010
  9. DB404

    DB404 New Member

    Messages:
    2
    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2011
    This post is pretty old, but I wanted to add a bit to it. First the 1910 Mexican Mauser is a small ring Model 98, and has the features of the M 98. The Mexican Mauser 1910s were produced intermittently in Mexico of modern steel, starting in 1910. It continued in production up to 1935/36, when it morphed into the Model 1936 Mexican Mauser. The Modelo 1936 included some features resembling the 1903 Springfield - a pistol grip stock, mimicking a Type C 03 stock, similar band spacing, and a knurled cocking piece (which functions differently than the 03). Basically, it is nothing more than a Model 1910 with a new firing pin head added. M1936 bolts fit and function in the M1910, and vice-versa. IIRC, an additional gas port was added on the left side. The M1936 was then modified in 1954 by lengthening the magazine box and re-barreling to allow it to use the 30-06, which the U.S. was handing out like candy at that point in time. The main point is that the 1910, 1936 and 1954 Mexican Mausers are all Model 98s, and were all produced within Mexico from quality steels. The late Eugene, Oregon custom gunsmith Larry Brace told me they were his favorite actions, and he hoped to make a .358 Winchester on one for elk hunting in Oregon. Larry did have all of the 1910s he worked on re heat treated by an outfit in Salt Lake City. When slicked up, they are very smooth and fast. Have seen sporters built on them in .243 Win, 257 Roberts, .257 A.I, 7x57, .284 Win. On the 1954, just 30-06.
     
  10. shortgrass

    shortgrass Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,993
    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2010
    Modern steels in 1910 & 1936? You need to brush up on your metallurgy. All Mausers of that time were made of low carbon steel and case hardened. Modern alloy steels, and steel manufacturing in general, didn't come about until the late 1930s and , really, in the 1940s, during WW2. Why did the 'smith have them re-heat treated? Probably because the heat treating methods at the time those receivers were manufactured were quit "sub-standard" by the methods employed today. Neither the steel used or the method to heat treat it should be considered "modern". Are these receivers usable? Sure, as long as their limitations are known and understood. But they are "ancient" technology in their manufacture. Nothing "modern" about them!
     
  11. DB404

    DB404 New Member

    Messages:
    2
    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2011
    Unfortunately Shortgrass, it appears that in your rush to make a point, you've taken my use of the term 'modern' completely out of context. Allow me to clarify my prior comments.

    Since other readers might not be as well versed as you appear to be in the history of the steel industry of Latin America, the following comments are included for their consideration. That being said, it is to be noted that the steel used to manufacture the indigenous small ring Model 98 Mexican Mauser 1910 was in fact, quite modern when judged by the metallurgical standards of the day. That steel was produced at the first steel mill to be built in Latin America, owned by the Compania Fundidora de Fierro y Acero de Monterrey, in Monterrey, Mexico. The mill was constructed in 1900; it was a pet project of the government of Porfirio Diaz, and was specifically designed to produce steel equal to the very best steels produced in either Europe or the US, at that time. The mill was designed to utilize the most advanced steel production technologies then available; it was upgraded as new technology became available. At the very least, the steel used to make the initial run of 1910 Mexican small ring 98 Mauser would have been equivalent to the steel in use at that time in Germany for 98 production, essentially 1035 low carbon steel, which was then surface carburized for wear resistance. The Mexican 1910 was essentially a copy of the small ring model 98s they had purchased from DWM (in 1902) and the very similar model they purchased from Steyr in 1907; both were derivatives of the Mauser 98a. FN produced a large ring model 98 for Mexico, the Model 1924; none of my sources show FN as ever producing a small ring 98 for Mexico.

    Mexican small ring 98 pattern Mausers, Models of 1910, 1936 and 1954, were produced internally, of high quality steel (by contemporaneous standards). Due to metallurgy and design, they are stronger and safer than previous Model 93, 94, 95, and 96 Mausers. They are head and shoulders above any Spanish produced Mauser 93 or 95. As Shortgrass points out, time moves on and there are better steels and heat treatment processes around now than were available anywhere in the world in 1910; additionally, milling machines and other production tools have advanced significantly as well. Still, a non-abused 1910 Mexican small ring action will be equally as strong as the contemporary small ring actions coming out of Europe. And any properly surface carburized 1035 steel small action Model 98 Mauser will be safe with the cartridges they were originally chambered for, plus others of similar intensity. Personally, I would much rather trust my health to firing a non-abused example of the Mexican 1910 than to a similarly non-abused US Springfield 1903 also produced in 1910. In regard to your conjecture as to why Larry Brace sent his 1910 projects in for re heat treating, I can repeat what he told me, which was that although he had never run across a 1910 that was "too soft" he preferred to have them all re heat treated uniformly, for potential liability issues, as he had no control over their diet after they left his shop.
     
    Last edited: Oct 29, 2014
  12. shortgrass

    shortgrass Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,993
    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2010
    Out of text? I don't think so. Your post just wasn't clear. There are at least two generations who haven't a clue about American history, let alone any history of steels, their manufacture and the advancements made. To them, when you use the word "modern", the steel of 1900 is the same as that supplied by current metal suppliers. The manufacture of steels and their processing has come along way since the small Ring Mausers were made. The heat treater in Salt Lake you're referring to is probably Blanchard Metal Processing. I've used them in the past.
     
  13. PBR driver

    PBR driver Member

    Messages:
    24
    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2009
    :cool:All Small Ring Mauser (Except the Small RING 98) should only be chambered into the original caliber or one of the same pressures such as if it was a 8x57 then one could go .300 Savage, 6.5x55mm, 7x57mm.
    Yes I have seen some in .243 ect. but this is dancing with the devil on his own ground.
    The only non 98 that one could possibly build a slightly higher pressure generating cartridge on is the Swedish Mauser's and no other . One still needs to use very good judgment in choosing the caliber.
    There are just to many other stronger actions out there which are made of modern steels with the proper strength to hold the pressures generated with modern powders to destroy a weaker and historically significant rifle design.
    Any one that would do so is a gun crank and is dangerous!
     
  14. specweldtom

    specweldtom Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,066
    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2004
    PBR driver:

    Thanks for a timely post. Between Shortgrass and DB404, I got a lot of good history and technical info.
    I had arrived at the same conclusion you did about using a small ring anything for high intensity cartridges. Only one I would even consider is the Swede, but still wouldn't chamber any of the modern high pressure cartridges in it. Carl Gustafs built some .308 target rifles on their small rings, and also some .30-06 hunting rifles called the Lynx, so I can only conclude that they presented no safety issues. Doesn't change my mind though. I still wouldn't do it.
    I would be comfortable chambering a large ring action for some of the modern cartridges, except for Gewehr 98's and late war German KAR actions. Maybe overly cautious, but.....

    What makes your post timely is that a good friend asked me this morning about drilling and tapping a Mexican Mauser and later on, rebarreling it. He probably won't end up doing either after I told him that a 6.5x55 or a 7x57 were his only choices if I did it. Hate to disappoint a good friend, but I have the luxury. Someone had ground the crest and date off the receiver ring so I don't know when or where it was made, but it did have the knurled firing pin knob, so probably a late model.
    Also that the rough ground receiver ring would have to be cleaned up in a mill and the front base shimmed to bring it level with the rear base.

    I would leave it like it is and move on.

    Thanks to all for the history, info, and opinions.

    Tom