The UK's Finest Independent Forum for Shooters and Gun Owners. Est 2010.

Ovenpaa wrote:Rob, this specific project is a 9,3x64 and yes it does have a reasonably short barrel, 22" from memory.

Interestingly the Russian military developed the semi-armour-piercing 9SN cartridge for the 9.3×64mm Brenneke SVDK variant of the Dragunov sniper rifle in 2009. This cartridge has a 256gr pointed boat-tailed FMJ bullet with a steel penetrator that can defeat most current military body armour out to around 600m.

Maggot you are focusing solely on range use there mate. There are no ROs or range flags in the field which is where the hinged floorplate magazine comes into its own and has several advantages over detachable magazines. Mind though that you could always get something like a 75/85 Sako that has the advantages of both worlds.

9.3x64 that's an interesting cartridge to chamber for Ovenpaa. You don't see too much factory ammunition knocking around in that chambering and even less brass for reloading. At least with the 62 if you get stuck its a simple matter to convert .30-06 cases.

Chapuis wrote:Maggot you are focusing solely on range use there mate. There are no ROs or range flags in the field which is where the hinged floorplate magazine comes into its own and has several advantages over detachable magazines. Mind though that you could always get something like a 75/85 Sako that has the advantages of both worlds.

9.3x64 that's an interesting cartridge to chamber for Ovenpaa. You don't see too much factory ammunition knocking around in that chambering and even less brass for reloading. At least with the 62 if you get stuck its a simple matter to convert .30-06 cases.

Not so Chap,

Dont forget that the mauser was originally a military number. The fact remains that with internal magazines there will always be a greater POTENTIAL (that word again, not a given that an accident WILL happen, just that circumstances may be more likely to contrive) to drop a bollock.

Your are correct, there are no breech flags or ROs in the field, which means the onus to stay sharp is 100% on the shooter to avoid putting a cheeky round through the landy or the gun safe.

We use the system of checking clear on the range as a failsafe, a luxury not available when you are alone in the field. This to me says that extra care is needed, particularly when wet, cold, tired, and/or excited, with a system wherby the source of the ammo cannot be easily removed (I hear what you are saying about dropping the floor plate, but on some rifles this is a cleaning facility and not something you would do to simply unload).

A damaged or mud filled box mag can simply be dropped/swapped.

As I say, I am not anti, but from a safety/ergonomic point of view, personally, I would prefer a box mag.

I dont see the advantages so please explain, every day is a school day bud

As in all gun safety it is ultimately the responsibility of the shooter to ensure his/her gun is safe appropriate to the conditions.

It is about understanding the nature of operation of the firearm and never assuming anything.

We seem to be too eager to blame the tool rather than the operator who is the one that is responsible for managing the gun.

In the field I prefer internal magazines as I have seen too many box magazines come adrift and get lost in the field, at the end of the day thoroughly know your firearm and operate it safely at all times, that is our duty as responsible firearm users.

Having carried my rifle quite a distance to a vantage point last Thursday only to find I had left my box magazine behind I agree, internal magazines have a lot going for them.

It did not stop me shooting as I could single feed however it is always a worry if a rapid second shot is required.

I now realise that the 3 position Mauser safety was to allow the bolt to be cycled and eject live rounds safely.

Aye old Paul knew his stuff and it all came together in the G98 action which set the standard for all bolt actions that followed.

Well it was good enough to be copied by the British Army for the Great War.

I am always intrigued by the number of Mauser clone actions there are (Including British) and did one consider trying to collect an example from every manufacturer, a thought I gave up on very quickly...

Fortunately we didn't and ended up with a better battle rifle.

Mauser struggled to get German military contracts and had to design an action that could meet the differing calibre/pressure requirements of an international market place. The G98 action did all this and therefore has proven itself over the centuries to be the most accommodating of actions

The Enfield action was designed around the .303 British cartridge and was a marriage made in heaven. It was never designed with the idea of being chambered for other calibres.

The Enfield was outshot by the Boers Mausers on the veldt just as the Krag was outshot by the Spanish Mausers in Cuba, from this both the US and Britain were looking at Mauser type rifles. However with the new tactical demands of the first world war driven by high explosive in never before seen quantities and the dominance of the machine gun the Enfield action came into its own.

"Fortunately we didn't and ended up with a better battle rifle."
Maybe so Dromia, but the Mauser makes a better sporting rifle though.