Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Ask The Gunwriters Hot handloads in an old Swedish Mauser?

I just bought a Kimber 6.5x55 built on what I believe is an old Mauser M38 action and barrel (it looks like it was put in a Ramline plastic stock).

I plan to reload, and I need to know if I should back off from the "max load" data in the manuals in deference to the age and design of the (1896?) Mauser action.

That said, does anyone have a favorite load/bullet for deer/antelope for the 6.5 Swede? And perhaps an elk load?

interested in where this goes too, as i have a similar one i am building. i'd say if you're in the neighborhood of 3200 fps with a 100 grain bullet you're about done. 3000 with a 120.

You've probably already done this but I'd get the headspace checked and work up from starting loads.

I've had a 6.6x55 Kimber Swede since 1995; which IIRC, was about the time they began selling them. Still have a 1995 Kimber advertisment for them showing that they were also avaiable in .22-250 & .308 although I've never actually seen one in either of those chamberings. If that Mod. 96 action was strong enough to be rebarreled to .22-250 & .308 I'd figure it could stand at least some moderately hot 6.5x55 loads. As for mine I've never gone beyond book max on any of my loads as I don't think it necessary as the 6.5x55 has a pretty good reputation "as is" without being hot-rodded. One of my favorites is the 129 gr. Hornady SP with 46.5 gr. of IMR-4831,running about 2612 fps out of mine,(that load's out of my old Hodgdon #26 manual, copyright 1993; wonder if it would be over max these days?). The 6.5x55 seems to thrive with powders on the slower end of the spectrum. Mine also came with a Ramline stock that was rubbing against one side of the barrel. Long story short: Opened the barrel channel to free float and then wound up putting a pressure point in the fore-end to achieve better accuracy. That plus a Timney trigger and a 3.5-10x Leupold and it's a real sweet shooter. Never even considered an elk load for it cause if I ever had the opportunity there's just no way I could ever go elk hunting and leave my 300 WSM home in the safe.

I have Reloader 15 and 22 on hand, as well as Hodgdon H100V, but I wouldn't mind buying something else if it works well.

And just to clarify: I wasn't asking about "hot-rodding", just whether I should stay 1-2 grains below the max load values in the reloading manuals.

Does anyone know about expected case life in the old M96 action?

Whenever you handload, you are tailoring loads to a particular rifle. I would recommend you use the 129gn Hornady for lighter animals and the 140gn Hornady or a Partition from 125gn and up for elk and you will be fine.

The 6.5 Swede is a very similar performer to the 7x57 when it comes to deer and antelope up through elk sized game. It is easy to load for and the main issue you will have is case stretching from the springier less supported action which does not have the 3rd locking lug under the bolt like the later model '98 version.

Aussie,

Wouldn't the two lugs at the front of the action absorb just movement as much as the 98 action, why would removal of the rear lug make the action springier?

On the subject for anyone in the know; did the rear lug on the 98 make that much of a difference? I was under the impression that it was the quality of the steels which was the limiting factor in many of the older Mauser receivers.

Thanks.
- Bob

The 3rd lug generates an improved rigidity for the action. With just the 2 front lugs, you will still get a compression on the action that permits case stretching which will result in case head separation.

The good news is that loading 100-150fps slower won't make any difference in most cases either in trajectory or the ability to drop the nominated game.

Don't worry about it too much and just enjoy your rifle.

My understanding is that the 3rd (safety) lug on a 98 Mauser is intentionally manufactured to clear its locking seat in the receiver by a small amount. It is intended to keep the bolt in the receiver if the front locking lugs or receiver ring should fail catastrophically, but not to contribute to the normal lockup of the bolt.

I imagine a gunsmith could modify a 98 so that all 3 lugs bear, but I cannot see an advantage to that. Also, if it did bear, it would not be unusual to find actions in which the tolerances of manufacture resulted in the 3rd lug being the ONLY one that was bearing, leaving the two main lugs clear of their locking seats.

The 91-93-94-95-96 Mausers do not have a 3rd lug and that is part of the reason they are not considered as safe as the 98 design, but other major factors are their gas-handling qualities and other details of their design.

The 6.5x55mm, (like the 7x57mm & 8x57mm) has always been loaded "hotter" in Europe than here in the USA. American ammo makers and reloading guide publishers must "lawyer proof" their products, so loads are safe for use in the weakest actions. In the case of the 6.5x55mm, it'; the Norwegian Model 1894 (and later) Krag-Jorgensen Rifles. The Husqvarna Commercial Mauser action was based on the Swedish Military Mauser, and is considered as strong as any.

The 96 Swede action is a very safe one, both in terms of metalurgy and workmanship, and I'd have no problem with full power loads in the rifle. As others have noted here, the 3rd (safety) lug of the Model 98 does not bear except in the case of the primary lugs setting back under very high over pressure. I've never heard of this happening with a Model 98, nor do I think it's absence is a significant negative in the Model 96 Swede action (I'd have no problem with full power lugs in a quality 98 if it had no 3rd lug).

As to the business of the 3rd lug adding rigidity, I fail to see how this is possible for the reason stated above - it doesn't bear in normal firing so from the stability of the action standpoint, it's moot.

Shoot that 96 Swede with no more fear than you'd have with a Model 98, IMO.

I didn't mention anything about the "springyness" issue, because I didn't want to start something with "Aussie Gun Writer". Show me a modern, high accuracy action that has a third "safety" lug. The reason for the M98's "safety" lug was due to a wide variance in the quality of the brass used 19th century cartridge manufacturing. Mauser sold rifles to governments around the world and many countries used ammo manufactured in their own arsenals, sometimes using smokeless powder for the first time. Mauser cartridges (for their time) were state of the art high pressure designs, and case failures were a problem due to "weak" brass. Many of these countries had large quantities of recently purchased Mauser rifles (many unused) in inventory, so the larger diameter receiver combined with a gas vent hole and a third lug gave Mauser's salesmen a good argument to convince a government to purchase new rifles based on safety, if for no other reason.

Proofing on the pre-98 Mausers was done to levels less than that of M98's as I understand from Frank DeHaas Book of the Bolt Action. The pre-98's were designed for cartridges that develop @ 45K - not ones that develop 52-55K pressures.

I will not say that the rifles cannot withstand these pressures, however, I will ask why bother? The last 5k of pressure that could potentially cause your rifle to unwind with potentially disastrous consequences will add what to the cartridge? Perhaps 100-200 fps, decrease the life of the brass by @ 25%, and lower your trajectory by maybe 5%. It may add 15 to 20 yards to your point blank range, but that's about it.

Recoil will be greater, barrel life will be shorter, pleasure will be less and usually accuracy will start dropping off.

Instead, load for accuracy, experiment with bullets and cartridge length, and when you find that magic combination that will give you under moa at 200 yards, test fire it at 100, 300 and 400 and go hunting. And write down what you did so you can repeat it.

I have two pre 98 mausers - a 96 swede built in 1896 and a 95 Chilean built in 1895. The Swede will put 120 grain Noslers in an inch and a half or less at 200 yards (it actually is better there than at 100...) off of a bench sandbagged in, and shooting a 20x 50mm scope in Redfield Juniors and rings. The 95 Chilean will put 3 Nosler 140's in two inches at 200. I have owned both of these rifles for more than four decades and they were excellent rifles when imported WAY back when. The triggers are good, the stocks are correctly bedded, the barrel crowns are perfect and the handloads are painstakingly built by me. These are exceptional rifles in anyone's book, but they're still the old military guns with the original barrels, original stocks, and slightly modified bolts to clear the scopes. If you get a good one, you won't regret it, and loading for them is a dream. Mine like ReLoder 19, Standard CCI primers, Winchester or Remington brass and Nosler or Hornady bullets in the mid range weights, and like to be around 3" OAL.

Oh - btw - I load from the Alliant manual and work for about 2700 fps in a standard 24" barrel. My barrel on my 7x57 is 26" long and on my 6.5x55 is actually full length minus about 0.050 for recutting the crown, so about 29.05". I stand hunt so it doesn't matter much to me what the length of the barrel is. These lengths give about another 20-30 fps per inch as close as I can tell. I have only chronographed these once and not with the combinations I now use. At that time, with a load that should have been giving about 2700 fps, the 7x57 was shooting a 139 grain hornady spire point flat base at 2784 according to my old records, and the Swede 6.5x55 was shooting Nosler Ballistic Tips at 2893 fps, again per the old records. I was using IMR 4320 and 4064 at that time.

just look at an extra 200 fps gives you in the real world, by even referencing trajectory charts...

so how much more do you really need?

you want something faster, or flatter shooting...

then get a 264 Win Mag or a 270....

having plenty of other rigs to pick from... my 1919 Swedish Mauser is usually loaded with a 140 grain bullet over 30 grains of RL 7....it is a very very mild recoiling rifle..

along the lines of light loads in a 223..

Most of the manuals I have seen have lower maximum pressure limits for their max loads with the 6.5x55 compared to other cartridges; with older rifles in mind. You should be fine to use the max loads listed in most popular manuals.

Of course, work up to them with normal caution used for any other cartridge...

30 grains of RL7 with a 140gr bullet? That must be in the low 30-30/150gr range...2200 fps?

This business of "proofing" dates back several hundred years and has nothing to do with a firearms ultimate strength or safety over time. When firearms came into wide spread use in the 1500's, any "blacksmith" had the ability to make guns and often did. Even in "factories", guns were made to a loose pattern individually by individuals. Metallurgy and heat treating was not a science, but almost a "black art" and those that did it well often would not share their secrets. Early on, catastrophic failures were common, the only way of testing was an overload. Safety became an issue as the demand for firearms grew, and the governments of most "industrialized" nations set up proofing houses to insure the safety of firearms made within their borders, however there were no universal standards. England, followed by France an the German States passed very strict proof laws, and soon became the standard against which all others were compared. The Industrial Revolution and modern steal manufacturing made proofing of mass produced firearms really unnecessary, but old laws and the bureaucracies that administer them refuse to die. Note, the United States never had any national proof laws, relying on "in house" proofing by the factory or individual maker to insure the safety of their product. That the infamous "low number" M1903 Springfields survived "blue pill" 30-06 (a round never considered "low pressure" by any standards) proof loads and was latter deemed unsafe after making and using 300,000 of them, is testament to the value of proofing for determining the overall safety of a firearm in the long run. The fact that your car brakes work the first time you steep on the pedal doesn't mean they won't fail at some time in the future.

In a front locking action there is no stress beyond the locking
lugs so there can be no "spring" in the action behind the lugs.
The third lug dosen'y bear anyway. The action dosen't have a lot
of metal over the right locking lugs a cartridge bailure can
blow it out there.

Norma pressure testing equipment is/was based on M96 Swedish Mauser actions. Recently, in a letter to the editor of either Rifle or Handloader from the head ballistician at Norma, it was reported that an accidental overloading of test ammo ran the pressures in excess of 82K. No harm came to the action.

I had heard of them but only recently I came across a minty factory Husqvarna 30-06 built on a Carl Gustaf M96 military action. Husqvarna, at one time, had confidience as to the strength of the M96 to safely handle .30-06 ammo loaded to CIP (Euro version of SAMMI) standards.

In essence, the issue of M96 vs. M98 is not strength but rather gas handling of ruptured cases or blown primers. There, the M98 have improvements that are considered to protect the shooter more.