Viewing 21 reply threads
  • Author
    Posts
    • #26097
      Goodsteel
      Keymaster
      • Gold
      • ★★★
      • Posts: 208
      • Comments: 2452
      • Overall: 2660

      What caliber would you chamber it in? (other than the original cartridge).

      I have a buddy that got a deal on a fairly clean 1891, and it wound up over here. Bjornb needed a clean, sharp barrel in the original caliber, so he wound up with the pipe.
      I am totally intrigued by the 1891 and find it to be elegant and of genius design, but I just can’t decide what caliber to go with.

      30-06? Yawn
      308? ZZZzzzzZZZZzzzzZZZZzzzz
      260 Remington? Hmmmm
      The Bob? don’t like all the brass prep.
      30XCB?
      35XCB?
      7mm-08? Interesting…….

      I just can’t land on anything solid. I do know I want to take advantage of the small size of this action and use a slim profiled barrel for a sort of mountain rifle. When I get around to it, I want to use a fine piece of walnut from Richards Microfit, and I want skeletonized grip cap, and butt plate. I may also have it engraved and color case hardened.
      So much of that depends on the caliber I choose though.

      This project is still a year or two out. Just trying to settle my mind on a direction for the caliber choice right now.
      In your opinion, what works or would seem to work extremely well in this situation?

    • #26098
      Larry Gibson
      Participant
      • Gold
      • ★★★
      • Posts: 55
      • Comments: 507
      • Overall: 562
      • Gold

      The M1891 Argentine action/magazine isn’t long enough for the ’06 length cartridge. The .308/.358 Wins with their minimal body taper can give some feeding problems in the single stack magazine. The magazine is hardened spring steel and is not readily adaptable. Thus cartridges with the standard Mauser case head and body taper fit and feed very well. That makes the action perfect for the 30×57 and 35×57 XCBs or a standard 35×57. Either of those with 26″ barrels having 14″ twists would be my hands down choice.

      I have rebarreled 3 M1891 Argentines with the pre-threaded short chambered Shilen barrels Brownell’s offers in 35 Remington. The 1st two were finish chambered with a standard 35 Whelen reamer to make them 35x57s. Both rifles perform extremely well, especially with the RCBS 35-200-FN. The 3rd M1891 I finish reamed to 35 Remington just to give the cartridge a workout to see it’s real potential in a bolt action. I then intended to finish chamber it to 35×57 also. However it shoots so well as a 35 Remington I’ve not done that. I did have to epoxy shims on the inside of the magazine at the cartridges shoulder to keep the shorter 35 Remington rounds in the magazine to the rear of the magazine (they’d move forward under recoil) for reliable feeding.

      Target photo shows two 100 yard 5 shot groups to zero the RCBS load (2150 fps) and a 200 yard group (3 moa added to Lyman rear sight).

      Larry Gibson




    • #26100
      uber7mm
      Participant
      • Silver
      • ★★
      • Posts: 17
      • Comments: 288
      • Overall: 305

      I am in agreement with your opinion on the ’91 design and pedigree. Originally designed for a 53mm case, the 308 Win family lends itself nicely to this action with regards to length. For a mountain rifle, you’ll want a lightweight weapon, with a potent cartridge. One popular cartridge for mountain rifles is the 280 Remington. Flat shooting and powerful enough for most hunting needs. The 7mm 08 is about 100 fps behind it, and would fit the action more readily. (There is magazine and action ramp fiddling to get a ’06 length case to work in a ’98 so I’m assuming the same with the ’91.) Yes, yes I know, shameless plug for the 7mm bore.

      Would you consider the 284 Winchester? 308 length that holds as much powder as the 280 Rem. There will be some action and magazine work to get the wide rebated case to chamber properly. (Might be a lot of work, since the ’91 has a straight stack magazine.) Brass is the only short oar of in that equation. While not unattainable, it won’t be as easy to find as standard calibers.

      If your leaning towards 260 Rem, there’s also the 6.5-284 Norma to consider.

      Regardless of the cartridge you select, you’ll have fun on this project, please share the process with us.

    • #26101
      uber7mm
      Participant
      • Silver
      • ★★
      • Posts: 17
      • Comments: 288
      • Overall: 305

      Larry says there isn’t enough room in the ’91 action and magazine for an ’06 cartridge. I will yield to his knowledge and experience.

      Therefore, I’m retracting the 280 Rem suggestion and substituting it with the 7×57 Mauser. That way you can still have a flat shooting mountain rifle with minimal modifications to your action and magazine, and I can still shamelessly plug the 7mm bore. (Assuming a 57mm cartridge will fit into a ’91 magazine.)

      Thank you.

      Charlie

    • #26105
      Harter
      Participant
      • Gold
      • ★★★
      • Posts: 76
      • Comments: 807
      • Overall: 883

      7×57 AI if you want to go exotic. 7×57 gets my vote for a shelf cartridge. To lend it to the case color flash and glamor of your want of old world grace 275 Rigby tags make the grace and style . Not that I’ve thought this over before ……..

    • #26108
      Artful
      Participant
      • Gold
      • ★★★
      • Posts: 187
      • Comments: 428
      • Overall: 615

      7×57 or 7x57AI would be an excellent choice.

    • #26111
      Goodsteel
      Keymaster
      • Gold
      • ★★★
      • Posts: 208
      • Comments: 2452
      • Overall: 2660

      Great ideas for sure. Thank you gents.
      One thing I feel I simply must try just to see if it feeds (doubtful I know) is the 6mmBR. I feel the BR cartridges are underrated as hunting cartridges, and I would love to have a repeater in either the 6mm or 30 versions.
      Another possibility I’m kicking around is the good old 7mm Mauser. I’ve always wanted a rifle chambered in 7X57.

    • #26113
      lar45
      Participant
      • Silver
      • ★★
      • Posts: 21
      • Comments: 224
      • Overall: 245

      I’ll vote for 7×57 also. It’s a classy cartirdge that’ll give you a wide range of bullet weights availible to handle most normal game.
      Here is a pic of my little 35Whelen on a M98 action with 17″ bbl and Weaver K4.

    • #26115
      uber7mm
      Participant
      • Silver
      • ★★
      • Posts: 17
      • Comments: 288
      • Overall: 305

      How about a 7mmBR as a compromise?

    • #26125
      Goodsteel
      Keymaster
      • Gold
      • ★★★
      • Posts: 208
      • Comments: 2452
      • Overall: 2660

      Love that M14 front sight. One of the best front sights ever devised by man IMHO.

    • #26128
      Scharfschuetze
      Participant
      • Silver
      • ★★
      • Posts: 3
      • Comments: 190
      • Overall: 193

      There really is nothing wrong with the 7.65 Argentine round. It’ll do most anything any other 30 cal will do and it will feed well from the magazine without any machinations. If you have a good Argentine barrel already, it might be easier to just turn it down to the contour that you want for a mountain rifle and give it a go.

    • #26135
      JPHolla
      Participant
      • Silver
      • ★★
      • Posts: 1
      • Comments: 120
      • Overall: 121

      250 Savage would be classy…

    • #26142
      Reg
      Participant
      • Silver
      • ★★
      • Posts: 40
      • Comments: 256
      • Overall: 296

      My love affair with the 1891 Mauser began back in 1962 when I bought my first one at a small sporting goods store in Winslow Arizona, it was what you would call my first REAL HIGH POWER Rifle !!! Carried it all over Arizona and later all across the Mojave desert in California. It left me for a while and went to Alaska but came home, was rebarreled and rebuilt about 15 years ago then went deer hunting in Colorado and Kansas. Number one son will own this one some day.
      This is only one of the many I have rebarreled, rebuilt, worked over, repaired and you name it through the years.
      The 1891 is a good design in the respect it will do all it is capable of doing within it’s limitations and it does have a few. I have always believed it should never be used above 42,000 lbs. It lacks the third locking lug, a inner ring, and proper gas protection as compared to today’s newer designs. The inner ring might be a mute point but pop a primer ( it happens ) and you will quickly find out about gas protection. Wear shooting glasses.
      Yes, Parker Ackley did rebarrel a few of them back in the 70’s to .308 Winchester but keep in mind he is not around anymore to sue .
      Good caliber choices are 300 Savage, 35 Remington, 250 Savage with careful loads and there is nothing wrong whatever with the 7.65 that it came in.
      If you want to take a garbage can, neck it down to a phonograph needle and fill er up with Bullseye, this isn’t the one for you.

      The origional concept for this rifle came from a old Williams catalog from back in the early 60’s that showed how to take a common military rifle and make it into a most modern sporter — using Williams componants , of course. I always liked the appearance of this layout but ran with the basic idea.
      Bolt handle is a Williams knurled and I wish we could still buy them, scope is a Denver Redfield in Jr. mounts, bolt sleeve is a modified 93/95 from Brownells and the trigger is a very highly modified Bold which gives a positive side safety

      The real eye catchy part of this one is the lack of the pregnant magazine. The first idea for doing this again comes from a magazine article from the early 60’s about the time they were starting to be imported. The rag writer never did say exactly how he cut the magazine back , just that he did it. This was the first of several experiments I came up with and while it works well you cannot believe the amount of work and fiddleing it took to get it going. It looks nice and does work but I could not reccomend it. I used the guard plate and follower only but made up everything else.

      The butt plate was from the military stock but I reshaped it a bit to narrow it just slightly then decrative deeply checkered the face of it for a better grip on the shoulder. The name plate is Wooly Mammoth and I still need to find someone who can scrimshaw to put in my initials.
      The nose cap is bent up from something laying on the bench at the time and the front sight is a old Pacific.
      The stock is origional and refinished and needs checkering. Many of the stocks on the 91’s were with better wood and if not too badly beat up do refinish just fine.
      The only complaint on the 91’s I have ever heard is that they cock on closing but since the was the rifle that broke me in I could never find any problems with it.

      I think I have a few pics of at least one other laying around showing a much better way to get rid of that magazine that is right at the balance point.

    • #26144
      Goodsteel
      Keymaster
      • Gold
      • ★★★
      • Posts: 208
      • Comments: 2452
      • Overall: 2660

      If you want to take a garbage can, neck it down to a phonograph needle and fill er up with Bullseye, this isn’t the one for you.

      What an epic mental picture! LOL!
      Awesome statement!

      Awesome looking rifle too. Maybe I missed it, but you do not mention what caliber it is? Original?

    • #26146
      Reg
      Participant
      • Silver
      • ★★
      • Posts: 40
      • Comments: 256
      • Overall: 296

      I kept the 7.65. I really find no fault in it and the accuracy is good too. I have taken a number of deer with it up to 150 yards or so using the Sierra 150 SP and wouldn’t hesitate one second to take it after black bear, elk or moose but would go to something like a Barnes or other good heavy bullet in about a 180 grain. Both weight bullets shoot good but any 180 in a light little carbine kicks the heck out of me.

    • #26147
      Smoke4320
      Participant
      • Silver
      • ★★
      • Posts: 11
      • Comments: 140
      • Overall: 151

      I like the 7-08 .. cases are extremely plentiful since you can very easily convert from 308
      It has many possibilities in bullet weight and capabilities

      of course 7 x 57 would not be bad either and keeps the “classic” idea

    • #26150
      CA Dude
      Participant
      • Bronze
      • Posts: 1
      • Comments: 11
      • Overall: 12

      6.5×55 Swede. A Classic cartridge for a classic rifle.

    • #26151
      Pasturedrag
      Participant
      • Bronze
      • Posts: 0
      • Comments: 15
      • Overall: 15

      That rifle deserves to be a 7×57 of course there’s nothing wrong with 6.5×55 either.

    • #26155
      Anonymous
      Inactive
      • Bronze
      • Posts: 0
      • Comments: 6
      • Overall: 6

      Coin toss between 7×57 and 6.5×55

    • #34724
      DallenK
      Participant
      • Bronze
      • Posts: 2
      • Comments: 3
      • Overall: 5

      How about 338 federal

    • #34725
      kens
      Participant
      • Gold
      • ★★★
      • Posts: 56
      • Comments: 531
      • Overall: 587

      If you could find 8mm slow twist barrel, or 7.65mm slow twist, that would be good also.
      .35rem is gonna be hard to beat though.

      A cartridge I have wanted is to take .308 brass through a .300 savage die for a .308 longneck. put that with a slow twist barrel, and you should have a very nice one, easy on pressures, and very cast friendly.

    • #34729
      Goodsteel
      Keymaster
      • Gold
      • ★★★
      • Posts: 208
      • Comments: 2452
      • Overall: 2660

      Steppapajon;n4668 wrote: Coin toss between 7×57 and 6.5×55

      The 6.5X55 would get my vote. Of course, then its a jacketed only proposition, but a very sweet one.

Viewing 21 reply threads
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.

© 2017 Goodsteel Forum. Designed by Covalent Designs, LLC.