6.5x55 M96 and M98 questions

[woodcr24]

Hello All,
This is my first post on the forum; I have been soaking up a lot of the info that I've found here for some time. I have recently acquired a pair of 6.5x55 rifles: one is an M98 Oberndorf Sporter Type B with a 24" Norma heavy barrel, the other is an M96 38 that was sporterized, but retains the original bolt, receiver, trigger assembly, and 24" stepped barrel. Both were purchased for dual-duty hunting and long-range marksmanship. SN on the M98 action indicates 1913 as the year of production, sporterized in the 1920's, I believe; M96 38 is from 1905, and I have no idea as to when it was sporterized (it's in a synthetic stock now). I may be wrong about the dates, but that's probably not too important in the context of this post.

I've been collecting as much relevant info as possible on the factory loads available, and am interested in hand loading to get the most out of these beautiful rifles. Specifically, I'm thinking about using two loads: one with a 120 grain lead-free projectile, such as the TTSX or GMX, and the other a 140 grain "all purpose" hunting/target round, using the A-max, VLD, or Partition. I have a fair amount of factory ammo on hand, and would expect to recycle as much of the brass as possible (most of it is Hornady and PPU; new brass would likely be Lapua).

The issues that I am having is that there is a considerable amount of conflicting information floating around on the web re: maximum pressure that either of these actions should handle. Much of it seems to be coming from the same sources, but numbers don't always jive. So I have a few questions, that I hope members with actual experience of ownership of either/both rifle can help me with...

First, what are the max recommended pressures for the M96 and M98? This is where most of the conflicting info on the web comes into play. Note that I am not trying to push the envelope. I am merely trying to use sensible loads, and, from what I have read thus far, I get the impression that the M98 is capable of handling more pressure than the M96. As an aside, I recently read a post on line saying that the M98 can handle "modern" loads such as the HSM 140- and 142-grain factory ammo. That's the second question, I suppose; is that accurate or valid? Can someone with extensive experience shooting both rifles tell me what their preferred factory loads are for hunting and/or long-range marksmanship?

Lastly, what is your preferred loading manual to work up loads for both rifles?

Many thanks for your replies...

Chris

 

[benchracer]

I've been collecting as much relevant info as possible on the factory loads available, and am interested in hand loading to get the most out of these beautiful rifles. Specifically, I'm thinking about using two loads: one with a 120 grain lead-free projectile, such as the TTSX or GMX, and the other a 140 grain "all purpose" hunting/target round, using the A-max, VLD, or Partition. I have a fair amount of factory ammo on hand, and would expect to recycle as much of the brass as possible (most of it is Hornady and PPU; new brass would likely be Lapua).

The issues that I am having is that there is a considerable amount of conflicting information floating around on the web re: maximum pressure that either of these actions should handle. Much of it seems to be coming from the same sources, but numbers don't always jive. So I have a few questions, that I hope members with actual experience of ownership of either/both rifle can help me with...

First, what are the max recommended pressures for the M96 and M98? This is where most of the conflicting info on the web comes into play. Note that I am not trying to push the envelope. I am merely trying to use sensible loads, and, from what I have read thus far, I get the impression that the M98 is capable of handling more pressure than the M96. As an aside, I recently read a post on line saying that the M98 can handle "modern" loads such as the HSM 140- and 142-grain factory ammo. That's the second question, I suppose; is that accurate or valid? Can someone with extensive experience shooting both rifles tell me what their preferred factory loads are for hunting and/or long-range marksmanship?

Lastly, what is your preferred loading manual to work up loads for both rifles?

Many thanks for your replies...

Chris

Here are two links that I believe to be particularly relevant to your questions:

Mauser: Small Ring, Big Controversy

6.5×55mm - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Take particular note of the CIP proof pressure requirements, then consider that the majority of 6.5x55's in Europe are likely to be on M96 actions.

IMO, SAAMI pressure limits for ANY of the old mauser cartridges are ridiculously low. I believe CIP to be a better guide. The CIP pressure limit for 6.5x55 is 55,114 psi. Assuming that both of your rifles are in good condition, either one should easily handle being loaded to CIP pressures.

Choosing to go above CIP pressures is a personal judgement call. I have a 6.5x55 built on a Mark X (commercial '98) action made with modern steel. I load it to .308 Winchester equivalent pressures, which is where I have chosen to draw the line. The next step up involves magnum pressures (around 65,000 psi) and I just can't think of a good reason to go there.

When I started loading for the 6.5x55, I was frustrated by most of the load data available. I consider the SAAMI level data available from most U.S. sources to be woefully inadequate. Vihtavuori has CIP spec data available online, which is useful for comparison, even if you don't plan to use their powders. I also used some rough comparisons to .260 Remington data as a sanity check when I started load development.

Still, I always felt that I was stumbling around in the dark when it came to loading for the old mauser cartridges. I finally broke down and bought Quickload, which I have found to be an invaluable resource. I highly recommend going that route.

Regardless of how you load for your two rifles, RL-22 is your friend. In either rifle, it will yield excellent velocity at pressures within CIP limits for bullets up to 140 grains and has a reputation for good accuracy in the old mauser cartridges.

As for factory ammo, I guarantee you that even the HSM ammo is not loaded to modern pressure levels. The best factory load I have found is the Hornady Superformance 140 SST. I have found it to rival my handloads in my rifle. It will be safe in either of your rifles.

Where brass is concerned, I recommend that you stick with European brass like Prvi or Lapua. They will be dimensionally correct at the case head/rim, whereas domestically produced brass for the Swede typically is not. I have found that to be important to proper functioning in a mauser action.

 

[woodcr24]

Benchracer, thank you very much. Your reply was extremely helpful. I've looked through much of Chuck Hawks' site, but hadn't seen that article. Had also seen the Wikipedia article, but neglected the CIP data, which in retrospect makes total sense to follow.

Both of the rifles are in, what appears to me, excellent condition. They have been well-maintained and look to be totally sound. Knowing that the US factory ammo is not loaded near the CIP max pressures eases my mind, immensely. I have a fair amount of the Hornady Vintage Match on hand, but hadn't purchased any of the SST yet (it's not easy to find). Will certainly keep looking for it.

I had planned on using RL-22, and Lapua and PPU brass (from my own previously-fired factory ammo). Will check out the Vihtavuori information, as well as Quickload. I'd like to develop a single load that will work for hunting everything from whitetail and boar up to and including elk.

Again, thank you.

Best,

Chris

 

[RT2506]

I have shot these loads in a number of Swede Mauser M96s for years with no problems at all.
I have chronographed these loads in a M-96 that I sported but left the 29" barrel on it.
Load one: 46 grs Accurate XMR4350, Remington case, Federal 210M Match primer, 120 gr Nosler ballistic tip or Sierra 120 SP, COAL 3.050 and it does right at 2950 fps.

Load two: 45 grs Accurate XMR4350, Remington case, Federal 210M Match primer, 140 gr Sierra sp or Hornady interlock, COAL 3.050 and it does 2800 fps.

Both of these loads are the max load from the Accurate manual which says that these loads are under the 46000 CUP that is safe for the small ring Mauser like the M-96. You really can not get much more of this powder into the case though. It would have to be a compressed load to get any more into it. The reason that I use the COAL of 3.050 is this is the max length that will work through the magazine but it is well under MOA accurate. The M-96 Mauser has a throat a mile long for shooting the 160 RN bullet originally used until the switched to a 139 gr spitzer. I have killed a bunch of deer with both of these loads and they all bang flop a deer. I prefer the 120 ballistic tip. I would not be afraid to take on an elk with the 140 Hornady interlock load but if I was going to use this round specifically for elk I would see what the 140 Nosler Accubond would shoot like in this rifle. You need at least an 8 twist rifling to shoot the 140 gr bullets. Your M96/38 has what amounts to about 7 1/2 twist. It is a metric measurement. By the way most all the loading manuals only list loads that are under 46000 CUP. The Sierra, Accurate powders, Hodgdon annual and the Lyman are pretty good but the Hornady is really mild. Good luck and good shooting. I think you will be happy with the Swede because it kills way better than lots of rounds because those bullets are so long they just keep expanding while it keeps going deep.

 

[woodcr24]

RT2506 - Thank you. Upon further inspection and comparison between the barrel on the M96 and photos that I have seen of the originals, it looks like this one is sporting a replacement, stepped barrel. It doesn't appear to have ever been fired through.

I'm going to try and locate some RL-22 and -19; the former for the 142 SMK, the latter for the 120 TTSX.

Two additional questions: is there any significant performance difference between the Federal 210M and CCI-BR or #200 primers for this cartridge (assume fired PPU and virgin Lapua cases). Second, if I can buy PPU for $75 per 100 rounds, and Lapua cases for the same price ($75 per 100), is there a reason to go with Lapua over the PPU?

Unrelated: the 96 is in a Ram-line stock; that will be replaced with a B&C, very shortly after Christmas

 

[Varberger757]

+1 to what @Benchracer mentioned! Especially both the 6,5x55 Swedish and the 8x57IS (8mm Mauser) are ridicously powerless following SAAMI! As Benchracer said, go and follow the European manuals. Here is another good and useful one, made by the "mother" of 6,5x55, Norma. Lots of save loaddata.

6,5x55 Swedish Mauser - Norma

 

[woodcr24]

Thank you, Varberger757. I had picked up a few boxes of Norma and Nosler ammo through Midway last week; they have it on clearance. I will be keeping track of the weights and dimensions of the various brands of brass as I go to reload them. Looks like Norma 204 would work for both loads; I'll give that some consideration.

Per Benchracer's reply, and also having looked at Barnes' site again, I'm going to work loads up for both the 120 and 142 using RL-22.

 

[Varberger757]

Here one more very useful website for the 6,5x55 enthusiast!

It's from Sweden with a pile of decent loads. Also avaible in English, so there won't be any obstacles.

Reloading data

 

[woodcr24]

Thank you; that's quite a site!

 

[woodcr24]

For handloads made with RL-22, is there generally a number of shots after which you stop to clean the barrel?

 

[RT2506]

Clean when accuracy starts to fall off. No two barrels are the same. Remember that more harm is done to rifles by cleaning them too much or incorrectly than ever by shooting them.

 

[woodcr24]

I'm back again, with a question pertaining to the M98. There about a gazillion posts on the internet re: rifles built on commercial M98 actions as being suitable for long-range marksmanship (e.g. 1,000-yd) or not being suitable. I'm signed up for a 3-day class next year for 800 - 1,000 yds., and my intention had been to remove the M98 from the wooden stock, which is not bedded, and place it into a B&C Varmint/Tactical, with a full aluminum bed. Recall that this rifle features a 24" Norma heavy barrel (I realize that I will need to mod the stock to accommodate this). This is going to run me around $250. The question that I have, for those members with experience at this range, and preferably with the 6.5x55 in an M98, is... what is your opinion? Assume that I am going to be using match grade ammo with 142-grain SMKs, firing around 250 - 280 times over the course of 3.5 days. In other words, take the ammo out of the equation. I have no idea what the rate of twist is; I expect that it's in the neighborhood of 8".

Many thanks for any thoughts you'd care to offer up.

[I'd use my CG-63, but I doubt that I could see a plate at 1,000-yds through the Lyman 48!]

 

[benchracer]

I'm back again, with a question pertaining to the M98. There about a gazillion posts on the internet re: rifles built on commercial M98 actions as being suitable for long-range marksmanship (e.g. 1,000-yd) or not being suitable. I'm signed up for a 3-day class next year for 800 - 1,000 yds., and my intention had been to remove the M98 from the wooden stock, which is not bedded, and place it into a B&C Varmint/Tactical, with a full aluminum bed. Recall that this rifle features a 24" Norma heavy barrel (I realize that I will need to mod the stock to accommodate this). This is going to run me around $250. The question that I have, for those members with experience at this range, and preferably with the 6.5x55 in an M98, is... what is your opinion? Assume that I am going to be using match grade ammo with 142-grain SMKs, firing around 250 - 280 times over the course of 3.5 days. In other words, take the ammo out of the equation. I have no idea what the rate of twist is; I expect that it's in the neighborhood of 8".

Many thanks for any thoughts you'd care to offer up.

[I'd use my CG-63, but I doubt that I could see a plate at 1,000-yds through the Lyman 48!]

My Swede on a Mark X action is in the exact stock you mention in your post. I have only shot it out to 600 yards. It has a 9 twist Shilen barrel, which most folks do not consider to be of particularly high quality.

I shot my rifle side by side with a friend who was shooting a factory Remington 700 Varmint rifle in .308, which he had been using in F-T/R competition. The same people who try to say a mauser is not a suitable instrument for long range shooting universally acclaim the Remington 700 to be suitable. At 600 yards, my "unsuitable" mauser far outshot the Remington, to the point that my friend joked it was almost an unfair competition. We were shooting for score, however, and he was outdriving me by making better wind calls, so he won our little shootoff in the end.

My two takeaways from that day were:

Conventional wisdom that a mauser actioned rifle is not a legitimate long range rifle, and cannot hold a candle to more modern designs such as the Remington 700, is BS.

As illustrated by my friend's actual scores vs my own, the rifle driver and his ability to adjust for conditions can, and will, trump differences in equipment.


My advice:

If you are shooting ammo you have proven to be accurate from your rifle, and your rifle is dialed in and consistent, stop fretting over your equipment and concentrate on honing your long range shooting skills. My bet is that you will have a lot of rounds downrange before your handloading skills and shooting skills eclipse the inherent capability of your rifle.

 

[woodcr24]

Thanks for the reply, BR. I get what you're saying, completely.