Go Back   CMP Forums > CMP Sales > CMP Bolt Action Rifles
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 10-29-2015, 12:28 PM
.22shooter .22shooter is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: VA
Posts: 2,214
Default the best mauser rifle?

I jumped into a conversation recently (couldn't mind my own business as usual) and my answer to the above question was "The A3 springfield of course!" The looks that I received..... haha

Seriously though, I've nearly talked myself into a few mauser variants (swedes and yugos) and shortly thereafter I remember that I'll probably be disappointed. Mostly because of the sights; I personally shoot forward mounted open sights very poorly.

My wife recently made a comment that its best to have a lot of things in pairs. She didn't think that applied to Springfields

Bill
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 10-29-2015, 12:32 PM
Stewbaby Stewbaby is offline
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Pelahatchie, MS
Posts: 564
Default

Can't beat a Swede for smooth and accurate, but I like my A3 more and agree, the sights are part of that reasoning.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 10-29-2015, 02:51 PM
S99VG S99VG is offline
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Northern California
Posts: 2,173
Default

Dare I say it but the 98 is a better design. By inches or miles I'll let you decide. The 38 Swede carbine is a nice little rig, albeit not a 98 action. It does handle and feel a lot like an 03/03A3.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 10-29-2015, 02:52 PM
.22shooter .22shooter is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: VA
Posts: 2,214
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by S99VG View Post
Dare I say it but the 98 is a better design. By inches or miles I'll let you decide. The 38 Swede carbine is a nice little rig, albeit not a 98 action. It does handle and feel a lot like an 03/03A3.
How? More importantly how does the superior design improve performance?

Last edited by .22shooter; 10-29-2015 at 03:44 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 10-29-2015, 03:51 PM
Deppizzymo Deppizzymo is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Canton Missouri
Posts: 496
Default

Believe it or not I really like the look of the FR8. I have never had the pleasure (or displeasure from the recoil?) of shooting one. Short, handy and complete with a peep sight. The only thing missing is a bent bolt handle.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 10-29-2015, 05:22 PM
S99VG S99VG is offline
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Northern California
Posts: 2,173
Default

Again, performance may be a measure of inches and not miles, but the 03 action has always struck me as an over complication of the basic Mauser design. I think the Mauser lends itself to better, or easier, bedding. It isn't encombered with an unnecessary mag cut-off and doesn't have the 03s less than stellar sighting system regarding its use as a battle rifle. Performance can be measured in many ways and these are just a few items in which the 03 doesn't really shine. Now for personal use I'd pick an 03A3, 1917, No. 4 Mk. I Enfield and M38 Swedish Mauser in that order. I really don't champion one rifle design over another. For classy looks though it's hard to beat a C-stocked 03. I'm not going to add IMHO because I obviously am not parroting someone else's opinion.

Last edited by S99VG; 10-29-2015 at 05:25 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 10-29-2015, 05:27 PM
.22shooter .22shooter is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: VA
Posts: 2,214
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by S99VG View Post
Again, performance may be a measure of inches and not miles, but the 03 action has always struck me as an over complication of the basic Mauser design. I think the Mauser lends itself to better, or easier, bedding. It isn't encombered with an unnecessary mag cut-off and doesn't have the 03s less than stellar sighting system regarding its use as a battle rifle. Performance can be measured in many ways and these are just a few items in which the 03 doesn't really shine. Now for personal use I'd pick an 03A3, 1917, No. 4 Mk. I Enfield and M38 Swedish Mauser in that order. I really don't champion one rifle design over another. For classy looks though it's hard to beat a C-stocked 03. I'm not going to add IMHO because I obviously am not parroting someone else's opinion.
Well noted! I appreciate the educated response. How is the A3s sighting system less than stellar? Unless your preference is for forward mounted open sights (few people)....rear mounted aperture sights of any kind are almost always an improvement.

Bill
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 10-29-2015, 06:26 PM
Rick the Librarian Rick the Librarian is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: NW Washington State
Posts: 7,087
Default

Without considering accuracy, the best Mauser "looker" to me is the M1898 GEW.

__________________
"We make men without chests and expect from them virtue and enterprise. We laugh at honor and are shocked to find traitors in our midst."
--C.S. Lewis
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 10-29-2015, 06:39 PM
tinydata tinydata is online now
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Jacksonville, FL
Posts: 370
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by S99VG View Post
Again, performance may be a measure of inches and not miles, but the 03 action has always struck me as an over complication of the basic Mauser design. I think the Mauser lends itself to better, or easier, bedding. It isn't encombered with an unnecessary mag cut-off and doesn't have the 03s less than stellar sighting system regarding its use as a battle rifle. Performance can be measured in many ways and these are just a few items in which the 03 doesn't really shine. Now for personal use I'd pick an 03A3, 1917, No. 4 Mk. I Enfield and M38 Swedish Mauser in that order. I really don't champion one rifle design over another. For classy looks though it's hard to beat a C-stocked 03. I'm not going to add IMHO because I obviously am not parroting someone else's opinion.
Relatively new guy here, but why is the Mauser easier to bed? I've looked inside both types of rifle and they have the same bedding system and general layout (a real surprise! )

Given the fact that I'll never fight with a bolt-action rifle, I can throw out the uneducated guess that I'd find the 03A3 the best Mauser design for combat use. The large receiver-mounted aperture is impossible to beat. That being said, I have yet to find a rifle that I'll take over the old 03 for leisurely target shooting. No matter how I try, neither the V sight nor the much-improved Swede M96/M38 sights yield the same results the 03 peep does. The infinitely adjustable rear complements the fine front sight very well- I can fine tune the POI right where I want it.


(I know, I'm shameless)
__________________
"As the troops used to say, 'If the country is good enough to live in, itís good enough to fight for.' With privilege goes responsibility."

-Eugene B. Sledge
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 10-29-2015, 08:52 PM
S99VG S99VG is offline
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Northern California
Posts: 2,173
Default

The 03 sight, not A3, is less than stellar. The bottom of Mauser actions are flat. "Springfields" have kind of a wedge shape in cross section. I just think that the Mauser design provides a better contact patch with the stock. As leisure shooters we can make all milspec sights work, but as a battle rifle I just don't know what they were thinking with the 03. Don't forget that the A3 sight was developed after Garand put one on his rig and Winchester on their carbine. Having said that I think if I were to lug one of these into battle it would have to be the 1917, unless someone handed me a Garand - but that's getting way off topic. These are just some of my observations?

PS - tinydata, nice rifle!

Last edited by S99VG; 10-29-2015 at 09:05 PM.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:13 PM.