Crossing Mauser action with an Enfield...why not?

O

Oleg Volk

Staff Alumnus
Just curious...what would prevent rifle designers from offering locking lugs in the front AND back of the bolt? Wouldn't that result in a more robust lock-up than Mauser or Enfield? Say three rugs up front and two in the back or some such...
 
Most of the manufactureers cannot get two lugs square with the barrel and 90%+ in contact with the reciever. Your solution could be done, but it would be a manufacturing nightmare.
Two lugs are more than enough strength wise, so there is nothing to be gained here.
If you want a safty lug just to make sure you are OK after the odd failure of the other two, i.e. triple redundancy or more, you can put in more non-bearing lugs or notch the bolt into the reciever. Paul Mauser did both on different models (M95 & M98).
Extra lugs do have the adantage of allowing a less than 90 degree bolt lift, and that is why some manufacturers use them. Three lugs allow a 60 deree bolt ift instead of the 90 degree kind. This is very nice, but it is not really for strength.
 
Take a look at the P14-P17 Enfields. They offer exactly this dual lug positioning, and this is why they are popular with Dangerous Game calibers.
 
The 98 Mauser has three. Two in the traditional position and one forward of the bolt handle. Springfield 1903 is the same.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top