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.

The 3rd locking lug on a Mauser '98 is a safety lug, we all accept that but to suggest there is no spring or compression in an action would make a person look pretty silly at a bench rest convention.

Those older actions are held back in factory loads because of their age, metalurgy and probably more importantly, the variation in spec's which would also effect chamberings and lead for each barrel.

Modern actions are beefier in the side walls and can be bedded in the recoil mortise area and the tang but because you can attempt to make an accurate rifle from just about anything, take considerations for what you believe is important.

The rear lockers like the Marlin single lug, Model 788 and SMLE were accepted for potential case stretching and head separation and because I ahev also experienced it from pre '98 Mauser actions, I still recommend lighter loads for these actions. If you don't get case stretching because you have loaded conservatively, that does not prove it does not occur.

My background in reviewing rifles always, without exception, involved handloading, developing new unpublished loads nad killing feral animals, often scores of them before the rifle was returned and the review published. I hammered these rifles so I could report on what the average consumer could expect from them.

The reputation you have is the one you generate and I would never report falsely on a finding which is why I often refused to review prodeuct or returned bad product if I found it.

This is not a scolding and I encourage all of you to call it like you see it, just base in on the facts you know and never follow old wives tales regurgitated in the gun press as many writers achieved fame beyond their ability to contribute and it got so bad a few decades back that later writers would never challenge these icons even when they knew they were wrong.

Australia has always been a dumping ground for obsolete product. We were still getting push feed Model 70's long after Americans would not buy one. Same with ex military rifles and action after about 1972, whole arsenals were purchased and imported so the experience there with '96's, 98's, 1903's, SMLE's #4's etc was not only extreme, the shooting culture was handloading only, with very little factory ammo ever seen in the field and thousands of animals killed with these same rifles in time frames that would be considered slaugher these days.

It is a very different background to the shooting scene here in the US. As always, I live democracy and welcome anyone else to have their own opinion and experiences.

I shoot very near full tilt loads in my 7x57 Swede with nary a worry.

In reply to your bullet weight inquiry, during over 40 years of reloading, shooting and hunting with the Swedish Model 96 in 6.5X55 (carbine), I have found the 139/140 grain bullets to be best overall for accuracy and for killing game. This oldie is one great cartridge.

The Swede Mausers are said to be much superior to the '93s and '95s that they are basically the same as. The story is that the metallurgy and or heat treatment was much superior thus resulting in a stronger action. While I've got little other actual evidence to prove it I would tend to think that while they're not as strong as a M98 they're stronger than the rest of the pre-M98s. There are a lot of M95s out that that have been converted to .308 Win and haven't blown up. The Swede is reputed to be a stronger action that that. Since I wouldn't buy a pig in a poke I wouldn't believe all the opinions put forth on the internet either. That includes mine. Do some due diligence research and form your own opinion.

Thanks, all. I'm thinking of 120gr Ballistic Tips @2800-2900 fps for deer/antelope, and a combo of 140gr Sierra Gamekings for load development and 140gr Partitions @2650 for hunting the big stuff.

I'd also sure look hard at the 130 grain Nosler Accubond, somewhat flatter than the 140 Partitions, should be positively great performance in the 6.5 (I used it in the .264 WM). No flies on the 140 Partition either for that matter.

Or the 125 partition.

A couple of bullets that work well in the Swede are 120gn. Sierra over 50gn of H4831 for 2772fps or 48gn of H4350 for 2867fps.

For a heavier load, I liked 48gn of H4350 again but with the 129gn Hornady for 2802fps. Tried these loads in several '96's and they shot and killed well.

That really is a "heavier load" - the max listed on the Hodgdon website is 45.5gr of H4350 for 2703fps with the 129gr bullet.

I've heard that current load data is often lower than what was published even just a few years ago due to overzealous lawyers looking for opportunities to sue.

Regardless, I appreciate hearing from people with real experience with the equipment I'll be using...and it's somewhat comforting to know that the action of the old Mauser can perform well with a load a couple grains higher than what I'll be using.

Thanks to all who replied.

I have mentioned this on another thread, but for what it is worth to this discussion, I have a DWM Mauser with 1897 dated on the receiver.

Sometime before I received this rifle in 1984, it was rebarreled in 308 Win. In that time I have fired maybe 8000 rounds through it. About 30 or 40 percent of those have been factory ammo loaded to modern SAAMI levels. The rest were mild handloads, eg 150g bullets around 2650 fps or 180g bullets around 2500 fps.

Now I am not saying this is necessarily the best idea. However the rifle was assembled by a good gunsmith, who had been using it for a while as his personal rifle. He was happy with the safety of it.

These days I load it mild, 150g bullets around 2600fps. There is no visible evidence anything has ever become stressed or overdone. In fact the receiver and bolt looks very sound.

I suspect I could have gone on shooting 308 modern-spec loads, but I hope to give the rifle to the kids and grandkids. And I would hate to have a failure. So in older age I have decided prudence is a virtue and think its worth going easy.

Obviously this is a different case to a Husky 96. Those things I believe would be fine with full power loads.

If the action is to stretch the bolt has to push on the rear of
the action. Reward force on the locking lugs may put the action
into compressioin. Bench rest shooters used to sleeve the action
to prevent flexing (bending moment) from recoil.
Of course everything in Australia is upside down.

I've found the 130 grain Nosler AB to be a really good bullet in my Sako 6.5X55. I don't push them, getting only about 2700 from them, but the rifle will put them into 3/8" all day. Furthest I've killed a deer with one is 400, closest is about 10 yards. Works well at both extremes. In my other 6.5X55, a jackknife sporterized Swedish Mauser I shoot 160 grain Hornady RN. I use this rifle, with its Williams receiver sight, as a rainy day gun in the woods. I'm getting 2300 with the 160's. Neither of my loads are particulary hot but they both work real well for deer.

The title of the thread is "Hot Handloads..."

Personally, I do not use 'hot' handloads in any rifle, new or old. I go by the loading manuals, and very seldom use even the max load listed.

I have no pressure testing equipment, and if I fire a cartridge with a load listed in the manual, but below max, then I check the primer for flattening, bolt lift, and CHE. If none of the three, I might increase the powder by .5 to 1 grain, but never over the max listed. I compare these to the previously fired cartridges, checking for flattened primers, sticky bolt lift, and CHE. If there is any or the above present, more so than on the previous loads, I drop back down.

I realize these indicators will not give or tell me what the pressures are, nor will they even tell how much over, if they are over.

I do believe that I can load up a group of cartridges, shoot them, and as long as I do not go over max listed in the loading manual, increase the powder charge slightly. Then, by comparing the fired cases from each batch, possibly determine if the second batch is getting too warm. This is not laboratory testing. At the most, it is guessing, and not even educated guessing.

But, and this is the way I look at it, if there is no CHE, sticky bolt lift, or flattened primers, and an increase of 1 grain gives one or more of those indicators, I believe I would be correct in thinking the 1 grain increase did give higher pressures. But not how much, or even how much too much.

Regardless of the load given, I can see no logical reason for loading a cartridge to the limit. If, for some reason, I think I need more velocity, I can always go from a .30-06 to a .300 Mag.

But then, there are people who want the most they can get from a .30-06 and if they do not get it, go to a .300 Mag. But, then, instead of being satisfied with .30-06 ballistics from the .300 they try to reach the limit with the .300. And if they do not get it, go to an even more magnumized .300.

Seems like the trend is to get a little bit more than what the cartridge was originally designed for.

Anyone ever tried necking down a 40 MM cannon shell to .30 caliber?

In a couple of my loading manuals, IMR4831 lists some pretty good loads for the 6.5 Swede. I have tried that and also RL-19 and RL-22 and got very accurate groups out to 100 yards. Put a bullet of good construction into the vitals of either a deer, elk or moose, and you're eating meat. Like others have said, the animals won't be able to tell the difference in 150 feet per second of velocity.

A little "off topic" but applies to "hot loads" in general. Never accept ANY load in a particular manual as gospel. It's a good idea to have several published sources of reloading data. That way you can get a consensus on what is a "safe" load. Be suspect of any load in one manual that is a lot "hotter" than the same powder/bullet weight loads in all the other manuals. Old timers might remember the Speer Reloading Manual #8, published in 1970. It was a big seller, due to the unbelievably high velocities listed for many cartridges. Some of the "starting" loads were unsafe in many firearms and the "max" loads were border line disastrous in most. Lots of sticky extraction and loose primer pockets on the first pull of the trigger.

Has anyone ever used the Sellier & Belloit 140gr soft point @ 2670 fps? It seems to me (without any firsthand experience whatsoever) that a moderate velocity round like the 6.5 Swede would put an old-style cup and core bullet to its best use.

And the low retail price wouldn't put much of strain on me, either, if I decided not to handload.

czech1022,
I have not used the S&B rounds on game but they gave satifactory accuracy at the range. My gun preferred the Privi Partisan and Remington plain jane's though

as for this question:
"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.

From my experience (a "bad" one) work up to a load your gun likes, as many others have already mentioned. Be extra cautious, I wasn't and I have the excellent designing of Peter Paul Mauser to thank that I didn't get injured. My experience only:

Rifle: Sporterized M96 Swede (most likely a Carl Gustav early 20th century, as I recall)
Powder: below max book level, one of the 4831's
Case: 1x or 2x reloaded Remington
Primer: CCI
Bullet: Barnes X (the old one)

I had read about keeping charges lower for that bullet and thought I had been "safe enough" at a couple of grains below max. Not so. fifth shot and I had a bit of hot gasses flowing back over my face and hands. Also a few splinters from the stock. However, and this addresses the "safety" of the Swede Mauser action, everything made of serious metal held together as designed. They bottom metal blew out of the magazine but that was part of the gas relief design. The stock cracked where the gas relief hole is on the side of the reciever. Bolt was locked up tight and took a beating to get it out. Thank you Mr Mauser! I wear safety glasses at the range (and most days hunting, as my work bifocal sunglasses serve double duty) so my eyes were not in danger. My habit of wearing double hearing protection at the range actually contributed to the situation as I was told by another shooter that they thought the report of the first few rounds sounded a bit strange. Therefor I didn't wonder too much about them other than they weren't anywhere near as accurate as "normal". They were not double charged, or even overcharged as I pulled the remainder of the ones I had loaded and checked.
I felt extremely bad as the rifle was a great example of a "truck gun", little finish left, old functional scope, whole thing cost $145 in 1999/2000. I used it when the weather was "nasty", never got anything with it unfortunately, but I nver worried about rust etc (on the outside that is!). I also felt bad about my blowing up a gun until the next month or so when a leading magazine had a feature on guns blown up by their writer(s?).Heck, mine could be replaced for about $250 nowadays maybe.

All this has made me extra cautious at the "reloading bench". I cross reference even more manuals now, check and double check my powder weight/measure, and I haven't been able to bring myself to use up the half box or so of those remaining Barnes X's.

I'm one who goes along with those who say find an accurate load below max and go for it. If you want faster get another gun (that's why they sell them, so we can buy more ) in a faster cartridge.

Be safe,
Geno

If I remember correctly, its in about the 2350 fps range...

haven't tried the newer 140 ballistic tip yet, but that would be ideal in my book...

with a 120 grain ballistic tip, that is about 2500 fps...

and with a 100 grain ballistic tip, its about in the 2700 fps range...

to clarify tho, my rifle has the old 29.5 inch barrel on it..

but all the above are easily 200 yd loads and then some...

and since about 99 % of all game are taken within 200 yds, along with the ballistic tips will open quite nicely down to about 1300 to 1400 fps.. they are more than up to the task of any deer you'd ever encounter...

30 grains of 4198 can also be substituted, but the RL 7 powder has been more accurate in my 6.5 x 55s...( 3 of them )..

I frequently run the same loads in a 260.. especially when I am taking kids out hunting and they don't have a rifle to use..

Your understanding is correct.

To the original poster...it is your risk and your eyes.

Personally I would minimise the risk by working up loads for your particular rifle...not by asking what others do with theirs.

I have a model 38 swede and as long as you stick to book loads you'll be fine. My gun shoots 48.5grs of Rel-19 and a 120gr Nosler Solid Base very well. I get about 2850-2900fps with it.

If you want a lighter bullet, I've had good luck with the 100gr Nosler BT over IMR4064. I think it's 44grs [Sierra manual]and I get 3100fps. It works well even on NY deer [took out the heart,lung, and opposite shoulder on 120pound doe last yr.]

And the improvements on the M98 action include two gas ports in the BOLT (not in the action), plus a wide flange on the bolt shroud that extends to the diameter of the rear bridge of the action. The shroud deflects gases and any metal from blown cases to the left/right/up, minimizing the effect on the shooter.

The gases also exit around the thumb notch of the military mausers on the left, and simply out around the bolt on the right hand side, should gases go that way.

The main strength improvement in the M98 mausers was due to the larger diameter of the front ring of the action. More meat equals greater stability, essentially.

Good action. Still not the equal in strength to the Rem 700 or the Browning BLR or Weatherby MkV, but good and safe and usable.

The limiting factor in rifles is the brass case. That is the lowest strength item, and if the brass case is supported so it cannot go somewhere it should not, you're ok.

Never been sure why idiots want to hot load the 6.5x55 when it works so very, very good at normal and safe velocity.

Use as much 22 as you like, There are better powders than the other 2
Case life is no different than any other case ...10+ loadings if you do it correct

10+ loadings are easy with my Mod.96. Of course, my loads are usually a grain or so below max.. The first several loadings are neck sized only. Then I notice the bolt closes a little harder. Then my full length die is already set to just barely bump the shoulder a hair and then go back to neck size only for the next few loadings. I never dreamed I'd get that much case life out of an old Mauser action.

Early Swedish steel was about as good as there was in the world. The ore had naturally occurring manganese in it, and the steel was almost as good as modern chrome-moly steel. So your M96 is made of tough stuff.

You will find loads developed to all kinds of different specifications, SAAMI, CIP, and some apparently independently chosen. So you have to pay attention to that. I would bet that a Swedish M96 would handle practically everything that an M98 would, but I still run my Karl Gustavs at about 54 KPSI. With a 29" barrel, it gives me 2800 FPS with a 140 grain bullet. In a modern rifle, with a 24" barrel, 3000 FPS with a 120 grain bullet requires 30-06 level pressures. Those are pretty conservative loads.

Ordinary pressure signs kick in around 70,000 PSI. Not seeing any pressure signs is emphatically NOT NOT NOT evidence that you are operating in a recommended pressure area.

Welcome to the 'Fire! This is one of the more insightful posts in recent memory. With a post count of just 9, I assume you haven't yet learned and accepted as fact some of the horse hockey that flies around here, some of which comes from below the equator. That's good! Keep posting, sir, and don't believe everything you read.

My "standard" loads in several Swedes is a 140gr Sierra, Speer, or Hornady over either 44gr of H4350 or 46gr of H4831. Both loads shoot identically in my rifles. Don't know the precise velocity, and don't care. What I do know is they neatly kill game at ranges farther than many folks I know comprehend shooting, and they are not hard on rifles or cases. My personal maximum kill range to date with the 6.5x55 is 325 yards, and at that range these loads produce the same results as at 25 yards. The Sierra bullet appears to upset a bit more than the other two, leaving a slight larger exit wound on average. All shots on game have been pass-throughs, which I prefer. IME these loads do visibly less internal damage to tissue than larger calibers, but that's like saying water is wet.

I have tried to stay out of this thread, but find I can't anymore:

1) Once again, very few people actually read the original post before responding.

The use of "hot handloads" in the header was unfortunate, because that is NOT what the poster really meant, as is plain from his first post. Instead he asked about using maximum loading manual loads, which cannot be considered "hot." Even the hottest 6.5x55 load data around is only about 55,000 PSI, which is considerably less than .30-06 level, which isn't all that warm itself. (I must also emphasize PSI is electronic pounds-per-square-inch, not CUP, copper units of pressure.)

2) The 96 Mauser action has been proven to be basically as strong as any small-ring 98 action--that is, totally adequate for any cartridge with a .30-06 sized case head. This has been proven many times when 96's have been rebarreled (often by modern manufacturers such as Kimber) to cartridges such as the .22-250 and .308, which have factory loads producing well above 60,000 PSI.

The third 98 lug at the root of the bolt and the better gas-handling of the 98 are basically irrelevant in this discussion. They're there for catastrophic case failures, common in the early days of smokeless cartridges. They're still fine features, but modern brass is good enough that many bolt actions designed after the early days didn't have nearly as many features to handle case failure.

The pre-'64 Winchester Model 70 is a prime example. It basically has zero provision for keeping gas from a blown case out of the shooter's face, but Internet discussions of the pre-'64 almost never mention this. Yet when the 96 Mauser action comes up a bunch of experts have to bring up the ways it was inferior to the 98, and imply firing one with loads producing more than 45,000 PSI is as dangerous as driving on the wrong side of a highway.

A 96 action in good condition (no deep rust pits, cracks, etc., both of which are rare) will easily handle any of the data for handloading the 6.5x55 in America, as long as the chamber throat matches the original specifications. This is both because the 96 actions are pretty darn strong, thanks to the very good steel used, and because even the "hottest" maximum loads published here aren't all that warm.