BRNO Mauser

ColColt

New member
Question about 98 Mausers. Back in my younger days I had sporter in 30-06 that sported a Mauser action. I remember it had VZ24 and BRNO on the action. The bolt was bent like most are today on rifles. I wished I had a picture but they didn't have digital cameras in 1970. That meant nothing to me then but, I think I let a good one go on a trade. Tell me I didn't do something stupid.

If I did, is this a good replacement?

http://www.mauser.org/german-k98-mauser-rifle/
 
The VZ24 was a Czech model on a standard M98 action. The Yugo 24, 24/47, and 48 were built on an "intermediate action" which is slightly shorter (fine for x57 an 308 length cartridges).

There are plenty of Yugo M48's still on the market in very good condition, cheaper than a Mitchell's Mauser.

Jimro
 
I bought a Spanish M43 mauser and was happy with that.
I also bought a Russian capture K98 that was cobbled together but shot fine.
A buddy of mine had a Yugo M48 and liked that. I think he still has his Turkish Mauser, although that's further away from K98 than most people like to go.
There's a lot of Mauser choices out there still.
 
.

I would suggest that maybe a better replacement to satisfy your nostalgia would be any one of the hundreds of .30-06 sporterized Mauser 98's out there. (Google "sporterized .30-06 Mauser 98 rifle")

Many were sporterized by Bubba, but there's also more than a few dark horse's / sleepers out there, that are pretty well done, but just not in style/popular today.

OTOH, the "right" Bubba would make a nice Winter restoration project..................... :p


.
 
No "Bubbatized" projects for this ol' boy! I've seen a few Bubba has worked on to make it better. I'm not looking for a 30-06 but either a 7 or 8mm.
 
I sort of feel odd saying this, but Mitchell's stuff isn't really "junk". The guns are way over-priced and have zero collector value, but they are safe and serviceable rifles. The language in the ads is never quite a lie, but is intentionally misleading.

Jim
 
If they would just simply call it like it is it would be different. They lead you to believe these are for real and were packed in cosmoline and they merely cleaned them up. It's hard to understand someone as reputable, caring about the American shooter, sportsman as the NRA obviously does would even have their ads in the American Rifleman as long as they have.
 
I agree that Mitchel Mausers are not junk, but overpriced and not what they lead buyers to believe they are.

Any BRNO rifle will be good quality. Any of the German manufactured 98s will be good. There's still a ton of them around. I bought a "Russian Capture" 98 with all markings intact for $265 off Gunbroker 2 years ago. A cool piece of history.
 
Never having owned one of these before I'm curious as to their accuracy...2-3" at 100 yards perhaps in a barrel not shot out?
 
If you refer to a military M98 they required minute-of-enemy-soldier and that's all. They are not precision rifles. A 2" group with a military 98 would be spectacular given the stiff trigger and crude sights.
 
Good article duplicated here:
http://forums.gunboards.com/showthread.php?142880-K98-accurcey

Excerpt:
Group size:

Throughout WWII the standard specification for acceptance of the Kar98K was a 5 shot group of 120 mm or less @ 100 meters. This correlates to a maximum 5 shot group of 4.32 inches @ 100 yards. This was with SS ammunition, not the more common SME load. By all measures the latter cartridge was not as accurate, with 5 shot groups on the order of 5 to 5.5 inches at 100 meters with some lots not being unheard of. Such accuracy is not all that impressive if one considers the M1903A3 was required to put 5 shots in a 3 inch group @ 100 yards with average grade 30-06 M2 ball rifle cartridges.

However the documentation that exists from the factories indicates the average rifle could produce much better accuracy. Rifles selected for optical conversion, either as marksman's rifles (ZF-41, 1.75 x) or sniper rifles (all other 4x to 6x power scopes) was 5 shots in a group under 60 mm @ 100 meters (no shot not contained within the scoring template), corresponding to a maximum 5 shot group of 2.05" center to center @ 100 yards.

Most interesting in examination of these documents is that the factory test was not sufficient to select the very best rifles, as a 5 shot group at 100 meters was not sufficiently discriminating, the Army weapons office preferring 10 shot groups @ 300 meters. The documentation indicates that a reasonable percentage of rifles could pass the 60 mm requirement and that given the number of shots there was no real way of assuring that the most accurate rifles were in fact being built up as sniper/marksman's rifles. The preponderance of evidence (including modern firing tests) indicates that the "average" Kar98K would produce groups well under 3 MOA with good ammunition, and that a good percentage of rifles off of the production line were capable of well under 2 MOA. While by no means National Match quality, such accuracy is sufficient to clean the SR 200 yard target, which is used in vintage rifle competition.
 
My military mausers were both 2 MOA rifles, which is all I ask of any mass-production miltary rifle.
Now that I think about it, I knew a guy at work from a few years ago that recommended Mitchell Mauser to me b/c his was working great and was not beat up. But he bought his to shoot with, not to collect.
I expect his was 2 MOA as well.
 
It also depends on the ammo. Case in point, same rifle, same day, Privi Factory loads vs handloads at 100 yards, using a Scout scope in S&K mount:

k98_ar42.jpg
 
Yep, hand loads make all the difference in the world in most any rifle. If I were going to use factory ammo it wouldn't be surplus. I'd opt for Remington or Winchester. Being a hand loader I'd most likely go for that knowing the price of factory ammo.

The Yugo Mausers(48) look appealing but finding one in good condition is another matter.
 
Back
Top