Receiver Opinions Please

A2 is an air-hardening (which is what the "A" means) tool steel that should be plenty strong and very hard if given the full treatment. For a comparison with 4140, Google both "A2 steel" and "4140 steel". I am not enough of a metallurgist to tell from the composition which would make the better receiver, though I suspect either would be fine.

Jim
 
The unhardened yield strength for the two is about the same, however A-2 has about twice the carbon content. A-2 will probably be a little more brittle over this If both are hardened to the same scale, they would be about equal in yield.
 
A-2 has quite a bit more carbon than 4140 - therefore the A-2 will have much more wear resistance .I don't know why they would choose that .It has to be heat treated to not much more than HRc 40 to insure something not brittle .The additional wear resistance is there though.
 
Both yield strength and % of elongation should be checked at the perspective Rockwell hardness of each material. I would think the 4140 would be tough like a wrench and the A-2 on the brittle side.

Where I worked we used A-2 and O-2 for parts of jigs and fixtures.
 
Last edited:
They say the hardness is RC 47/48, harder than most Mausers, but nowhere near the '03A3 range. The wording is odd but they seem to say the receiver is drilled and tapped 6/48, so even if it is hard there should be no big problem.

Jim
 
Didn't the 03-A3 have a very hard surface and a slightly softer core?

Just checked out the ad and the receiver looks great on paper. The only reason I can see for using A-2 is that it is air hardening and therefore would have minimal dimensional changes during hardening/cooling vs. 4140 which has quite a severe quench to get the hardness.
 
Last edited:
The safety, bent bolt, drilled and tapped and the hinged floor plate would cost that much if you used a Mauser action. If you can believe what you read on the Internet, this action will be the #1 seller.

I did not see "while supply last".

F. Guffey
 
Did I make a bad decision to base a 35 Whelen on this receiver?
Click to expand...

That is the caliber I am going to use. I have a lot of respect for the 35 Whelen, my gunsmith recommended a #4 Douglas contour for the weight. I am going for a 1:14 twist as I do not plan to shoot anything heavier than 250 grains. I have a 35 Whelen , #2 Douglas contour, it weighs 8 lbs 11.2 oz, with scope, and the recoil is painful. The only problem is getting the barrel and the stock, everything is 10-14 weeks back order!

These actions do not have Belgium proof marks, but SARCO claims they are Belgium made. The receiver is marked Dumoulin Herstal SA.

The split receiver ring collar is a departure from M98, and is what FN did, but the rest of the action is very M98 Mauser. It has the guide rib, undercut claw extractor tongue, milled magazine feed lips, the firing pin interlock, the two piece firing pin shaft. It has a modern M70 safety and hinged floor plate. The Mauser actions of the 50’s did not have these features so this is an improvement.

I don’t know what rings it will take, neither does Sarco. The threaded holes are 6-48, need a drop of oil and a little screwdriver to get the screws to start.


It almost fit into a M1908/34 CZ action. The trigger guard screws line up with the stock, but the magazine and floorplate are larger. Based on my measurements, the screw holes are 19.9 cm (about 7 13/16”) apart. The receiver ring is wider than my Columbian Mauser receiver ring, but not by much.

My action fed 308 and 30-06 from the magazine.

I am skeptical whether these receivers are made of A2 steel. When I talked to Sarco, I was not impressed with the technical competency of the person on the phone, so whether the receivers are made from A2 steel is an article of faith. It could be that it is a European steel close in composition to A2, given that steel specifications are different, because the specifying agencies are different corporations. Given that this is the 21st Century, a competent designer/manufacturer would use an alloy steel instead of the plain carbon steels FN used in the 50’s, and a decent alloy steel is an improvement. My preference would be 4340 for toughness. I have not looked up the fatigue or Charpy impact results on A2, and I would be interested in the comparison, assuming that the receiver is made from A2.

I have not seen a Mauser action of this quality since the 50’s FN’s, and it has a better safety, trigger, and floor plate.


Front dovetail, no idea what will fit.








30-06 cases, all fed from magazine


308 Win fed from magazine
 
Last edited:
I built a 358 Norma on a Winchester model 70 action, The recoil was brutal

I just can't get excited about an action that's going to require a lot of hand work to make everything fit and look good, By the time you have a barrel and stock added to the total where is the savings? The upside I liked the look of the action, down side the work that will go into the rifle to finish it out been there and done that for the last time. I am wanting another rifle but am looking/thinking a new Winchester Model 70 classic in 30/06 to finish out my collection.. William
 
I just can't get excited about an action that's going to require a lot of hand work to make everything fit and look good, By the time you have a barrel and stock added to the total where is the savings?
Click to expand...

There is no savings, outside of not buying a factory Dumoulin. I checked those out and factory Dumoulin’s are thousands of dollars. The last I checked on modern made Mauser 98 actions, which had to have been in the early 90’s, they were expensive. I replied to an ad in Shotgun News, and the first thing the gentleman who answered the phone said, "these actions are XX giga dollars". I forget the amount, but it was staggering and that was all the gentleman needed to say. Mauser actions always were expensive, FN Deluxe rifles were more expensive than pre 64 M70’s. As time went on, FN continued dropping Mauser 98 features, under the Browning name, by the time you get into the 70’s, about the only thing left that was Mauser was the claw extractor.

So, buying one of these actions does not make economic sense, what makes sense, if you want a 35 Whelen, go buy a used factory rifle. Or a custom rifle who, off the owner, who like me, will never get the price of the custom job on resale.

But I wanted a real Mauser action, and I wanted a modern action built out of modern steels. I was not going to rip up a early 50’s FN Deluxe, or a J. C. Higgins M51, because I abhor the ruination of an historical object.
 
I posted on another thread about these, they seem like one hell of a buy.

Cripes, even "project" K98-based Mausers- with pitted and rusted receivers and shot barrels- sell for as much. Why buy an old Mauser for a build when one can get this for $295?

Stock mods (opening up magwell, action screws if needed) seem minor. As we always say, it's easy enough to remove material; can't do the opposite. Besides, I'd epoxy bed and install pillars...making precision for much of any inletting mods unnecessary.

Far as the mounting holes for ring bases, seems it would not be too difficult to enlarge the existing holes, #8 wouldn't be a bad idea anyway. Then drill out picatinny rails sections, or a full-length rail, to match the pattern with a mill.
 
OK, it appears that I made a good decision. Maybe not from a financial perspective, but I wanted a darn Mauser.
Thanks for the feedback and technical information. Now on to the task of finding the barrel and fitting work at a price I might be able to afford. ;)
Oh yeah, then a stock properly pillared and bedded with a decelerator fitted.
 
Here is something to look at when designing guns. Receiver strength can be much lower than barrel strength. The receiver only needs to prevent the bolt from separating away from the breech of the barrel, and that pressure is really much lower than the hoop (circumferential) strength of the barrel at the chamber. The longitudinal pressure, which is between the bullet, and the inside rear of the cartridge is much lower, by a good factor, than the bursting strength of the chamber walls. Hoop strength comes from the old barrel hoop strength, that if a hoop broke, the staves would fall apart. This failure is a longitudinal crack, or the banana peel effect you see on a burst barrel. The other pressure, or longitudinal pressure, would be the barrel actually pulling apart, which is the low side. Cracks, or failures are always at 90 degrees to the pressure exerted.

Since the longitudinal pressure is so low, a lot softer material can be used for the bolt and the frame, and the barrel thread portion of any frame. There are plenty of steels that will work at the as annealed yield strength, with a good safety factor applied. The only caution would be if one was trying to make something extra light weight, and to get the yield up, you had to harden it.
 
Mausers were always expensive actions/rifles. We are used to buying military surplus weapons at a fraction of what they originally cost, and think those prices reflect the actual cost, when they reflect the fact that nations sell off obsolete and surplus materiel dirt cheap to save the cost of storing it. (In the 1920's, Krag rifles were sold by the U.S. Army through the DCM for as little as $1.25. Even thought that wold be $45 or so in today's money, the actual cost would have been much more.)

Jim
 
My Midway Green Mountain barrels arrived, I thought this would be helpful as I have not found anyone taking the time to put actual barrel weights on the web.

F34 contour Green Mountain short chambered and threaded for M98, 35 Whelen CM 1:14 twist 24” 2 lbs 15.2 oz

F34 contour Green Mountain 30-06 CM 1 24” 3 lbs 2.0 oz

Dumoulin action 3 pounds 2.8 ounces

Boyd’s laminated stock, 13 ¾” pull, 2 lb 9.4 ounces.

Action/Barrel/Stock in 35 Whelen 8 lb 11.4 ounces, with 30-06 barrel 8 lbs 14 ounces.

Bedding and scope will raise the weight. I like the feel with the 30-06 barrel, I am concerned about the recoil with the 35 Whelen barrel. Mind you, 99.99% of my shots are with 14 lb+ target rifles. My NM AR15 weighs 17 pounds. Lugging that thing, 1000 yards to the pits at Vaile, was like carrying a ship anchor.

The action almost dropped into the Boyd’s stock. I could press the action in, but it would pop out. I think the receiver ring is a little wide and long for the Boyd’s. A little time with a dremel tool and wood scrappers, and everything will fit. The trigger guard did drop in, but it was pushed out if I opened the hinged floorplate. A recess needs to be cut into the stock to clear the tip of hinged floorplate.
 
Slamfire, I'm interested to know if you plan to follow the "recommendations" on the Sarco webpage for these receivers. As in, square the receiver and bolt face, etc...
 
Those recommendations were like mom and apple pie for gunsmith instructions. There is nothing in them unique to that action.

The truing the face, lapping the lugs, truing the bolt face.... would trace back to the Kuehnhausen Mauser book. I still have some Mausers lying around from 2002 when I built tooling and fell for some of that.

Don't do that.
At least of my 100+ Mausers I have worked on and over load tested, I never sent a Mauser to the heat treat shop.
What a terrible book!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top