I was sitting around thinking about what I might be able to do "gunsmithing-wise" with my lathe as I waited for the replacement shaft to arrive for my back gears. Since it's only the back gears that are out of commission, I can still use the lathe for regular between-centers and chuck-mounted work.
 
I remembered that it was always my intent to use one of the VZ-24 take-off barrels I have for one of the .323 Steyrs. I ran the numbers through QuickLoad to see which chambering - the short-throated one for the 125-grain bullet, or the long-throated one for the 195-grain bullet - would be best in the short barrel. Since the VZ-24 barrel is kinda short to start with and would have to be shortened further because of the counterbored muzzle, the best performance is realized with the short-throated chamber spec'd for shooting the 125-grain bullet instead of the long-throated chamber for the 195-grain bullet. I had everything I needed to do my first chambering.
 
Other than taking 3 hours, it went well. At 50 thousandths-at-a-time it takes a lot of iterations to get a reamer 2.370" deep. Nonetheless, it's done and I'm pleased with the outcome. I cut off a little more than an inch from, and then dressed the muzzle.
 
Given the shortness of the barrel, this rifle is definitely going to wear a Mannlicher stock. Because it will have a full-length stock, I think I'll leave the military steps in the barrel. I'm going to polish the barrel and the receiver before I put them together for the final time.
 
The receiver is a "scrubbed" VZ-24, so I'll drill and tap for a scope, and that will hide the mediocre job done "scrubbing" Tito's crest off. I could then send this metal off to the guy that says he'll do the hot-bluing for $65.
 
Even with the barrel shortened to 21.75", QL predicts a muzzle velocity of 3350 f/s with the 125-grain Hornady bullet with a "standard" Mauser chamber pressure of 56,565 PSI. (The CIP standard chamber pressure for the Steyr is 62,366 PSI.) Sighting in for a 6" target, it's 3" low at 310 yds, and still carrying 1500 ft-lbs of energy. It carries 2000 foot-lbs out to 200 yds. A 28" barrel (Turk '38 take-off), might have given as much as 3538 f/s MV which would have extended the -3" down yardage to 315 and it would have had 1700 ft-lbs of energy at 300 yds. The 21.75" barrel ballistics are fine though. It's designed as a deer/black bear/sheep cartridge, and will do fine as such.
 

Hi Gitano,


Sounds like your cooking may I suggest that you go to the Mauser resouce page of Steve (oh Blast I cannot remember his last name :frown ) site and make up a Lug seat lapping tool. I expect you know of the site. he has soem good stuff on it .


Ah it's Wangner:-


http://www.gswagner.com/
 
 

If you don't by chance know of the site it's certainy worth a trip and look around.

Sounds Like Fun!

Thanks for reminding me of Wagner's site BH. I had it bookmarked, but had forgotten about it. What I got immediately from it were plans for an action wrench and barrel vice. Two items I need right now. As for lapping the lugs, this particular bolt mates almost 100% with the receiver. It's close enough for me. That said, I will be making jigs to lap both the bolt lugs and the internal shoulders. I have found about 0.003" difference from one side to the other in the distance from the inside shoulder to the outside shoulder on all three Turk actions I have. I'm not sure this really matters much to accuracy, but it sure can't hurt to have the inside (torque) shoulder square with respect to the face of the action and perpendicular to the long axis.
 

QuoteSounds like Fun!

And it is! More than fun though, it is satisfying. I like making, and growing things. Thanks again for the .376 Steyr dies. I do appreciate them.
 
Paul

Can I put in an order now for a rifle chambered in .22 rimfire belted magnum (Jay has a picture of the cartridge) with stainless steel action blending into a mirror polish blued barrel running round to hex then to octagon at 30" long, iron wood thumbhole stock, clip fed and keep the over all expense under a $100??

I was gonna say, "Sure, put in whatever 'order' you feel like. I'll let ya know when it's ready for pick-up" but since you low-balled me with the $100, the deal's off. :D
 
On a related note, I ordered a couple of adjustable reamers to ream the bushings for the Hornady neck-sizer die. The reamers were made in China, and were so bad I can't even begin to describe all that was wrong with them. Really ticked me off. The seller - Wholesale Tool - said I could return them for "credit". I'm gonna hafta make my own reamers.... and I won't be doing business with Wholesale Tool in the future.
 
Paul

Gitano, this new cartridge sounds absolutely amazing.
It would cream coyote and varmints.
But isn't a 125gr a little light for deer or black bear, unless you have a specific bullet in mind?
Incidentally, do you intend to have a crack using some of the good 220gr 8mm bullets with the long throat?
Woodleigh even makes a 8mm 250gr RN.

Kombi, I find 60 gr 22 cal. bullets good medicine for deer and black bear. Most any 125 gr. bullets would be a real whacker on deer and bear.  ......Paul H

Fair enough.
I just tend to like to ensure that my choice of cal and bullet mass is big enough.
I wouldn't even use a .22 cartridge, 22/250 included, on feral goats let alone deer.
Mind you, you guys have been hunting deer and bear longer than I've been alive so my opinion is quite arbitrary.

Kombi,
 
As Paul_H said, the 125 is plenty of medicine for deer and black bear. I've shot black-tailed deer, white-tailed deer, mule deer, pronghorned antelope, dall sheep, caribou, moose and black bear with a 115-grain 7mm HP out of a 7x300 Weatherby, and they all obligingly died in their tracks or after traveling no more than a body length. The key to using light-for-caliber bullets is making them go as fast as you accurately can. Black bear really aren't very tough to kill. In fact, I'd be inclined to use a smaller cartridge on a black bear than I would on a caribou.
 
There's "news" on this rifle.
 
First to recap the adjustable reamer issue: The problem was "operator error". I'll pass a small amount of the buck to the folks at Wholsesale Tools, as I did call them and ask for specific instructions on its use just in case it didn't work as I thought it did. They "confirmed" that my understanding was correct. They were wrong. The short story is that I simply couldn't believe that the things were SO far off, so I disassembled one. As soon as I did that, its operations were clear. It works as advertised, and I got all the bushings made for the four calibers.
 
Next, I cast the chamber, and even though I said I'd post pictures, they're so boring I decided not to waste the bandwidth. Everything is just as it should be. Good, but boring photographically speaking.
 
Next, I scrubbed the bore and slugged both the muzzle and the bore. The good news is that the muzzle slugs the same as the rest of the bore. The bad news is that the lands are very rounded. The bore mics at 0.314" and 0.314" and the grooves at 0.324" and 0.325". Groove diameters of 0.324" and 0.325" are NOT good, as the bullets mic right at 0.323". Also, the bore just ahead of the chamber for about 3" is very tight, then for about 12 to 14 inches it's very loose, then it tightens back up for about the last 7-to-8 inches at the muzzle. If this thing turns out to be a "shooter", it'll certainly be a surprise. Hopefully, the deep grooves will over-ride the rounded edges and the speeding little bullet won't "strip".
 
The barrel issues aren't really disappointing, as this is as much an "exercise" as anything. I've got another 8mm barrel that's brand new. It will end up being only about 23", so it might get chambered for the 125-grain bullet. If I do, I'll get a 26 or 28" barrel for chambering for the 195-grain bullet.
 
If I can get a few other issues out of the way early tomorrow, I'll make the barrel vice and action wrench. Once that's done, I'll put the barrel on the action, and put the barreled action in a spare VZ-24 stock I have for test-firing. If after test-firing it looks like the barrel isn't going to be a problem, I'll take it apart - polish the barrel and action - and send them off to be blued.
 
I'm still undecided on whether to drill and tap the receiver for a 'scope. It would be "appropriate" for a rifle chambered in this cartridge to be wearing a 'scope. However, I greatly prefer "scout" type 'scope mounts to receiver-type mounts. My problem is, on a Mannlicher stock, I'm not sure how the scout mount will "look". We'll see.
 
Paul
 
I just reread your post Kombi, and realized that I didn't answer all of your questions - specifically ones regarding the heavy-for-caliber bullets.
 
As a general rule, I prefer light-for-caliber bullets in calibers smaller than .348, and heavy-for-caliber bullets in the "big bores". Truth of the matter is, I had one .376-based reamer - the short-throated 8mm version - specifically made for the Hornady 125 SP. I then had a throater made so I could chamber a barrel with the short-throated reamer and use the throater to extend the throat for the Hornady 195 SP International. I have spent a lot of time trying to get 125, 150, and 175-grain bullets to "work" in the various 8mm milsurps I have, basically to no avail. I am fairly convinced that is due to the VERY long throats of all of the milsurp rifles I have or have seen. I would be using the Remington 185-grain bullet, but I found the Hornady 195, and when I checked it out with QuickLoad, it was the bullet that delivered the most energy at the longest range of ALL 8mm bullets. And it wasn't just a little bit better, it was WAY better. I'm really hoping it is as good in real life as it is on paper.
 
For the most part, the 8mm caliber is more than enough for everything on the North American continent. It's even "adequate" for coastal brown bears. (I prefer the .338 WM as a personal minimum however.) That said, I see no need for the 8mm "bruisers" of 200, 220 and 250 grains. When the numbers are crunched, those heavyweight bullets just don't deliver the energy. What they DO do is punish at the non-muzzle end of the gun.
 
Paul

Hi Gitano,

     Rounded lands should not really effect accuracy, providing there is enough depth to engage the bullet, regard it like a metford rifling. The problem as you surmise is likely to be the inconsistant bore diameter. Only time and testing will tell on that.

      Now as for your short throat theory can you please explain if it's as you think that the Swedish Mauser's and rifles chambered for 6.5x55 do so well with light pointed bullets when most are throated for the long 160 Grain Round Nosed bullet?

BH,
 
The issue with the rounded lands is their ability to "hold on to" a bullet doing about 1000 f/s faster than the barrel was designed for. It would be easier for a bullet to "strip out" in a rifle with rounded lands than it would in one with sharp-cornered lands. I do think the depth of the lands will help in this matter though. As you say, only shooting will tell.
 
As for the 6.5 Swede, the "initial conditions" you describe are not consistent with what I've seen in the rifles I own. While the6.5x55 Swede may have been designed with a 160-grain bullet in mind, the designers apparently intended it to be seated deeply, as none of the 6.5x55 Swede rifles I own have particularly long throats. Also, while I am aware of the use of the 160 RN in the "early" days of military use, I thought that the 140-grain bullet has been the bullet of choice since after WWII. It has certainly been the primary bullet in the US far as long back as I can recall.
 
Personally, I would classify a 140-grain bullet in .264 caliber as "heavy-for-caliber". Paper-whipping the external ballistics, the "optimim" weight bullet for a 6.5x55 Swede is about 130 grains. Given the choice of bullets available today, I consider the 160-grain RN rediculously heavy for the 6.5x55 Swede. I acknowledge that the 160-grain RN bullet got lots of favored use in Africa a hundred years ago, but... While the animals back then weren't different than they are today, ALL the components of ammuntion were... The most significant changes being bullet design.
 
Finally, it is not a certainty that my inability to get the milsurp rifles I have to shoot the light-weight 8mm bullets accurately is due to their long throats. It is just the only variable that is consistent among them AND is a reasonable explanation. I simply can't find another reason. In all the "modern" rifles I own, light-for-caliber, flat-based bullets shoot the most accurately. In some of those8mm milsurps I refer to, the distance from the leading edge of the bullet's bearing surface to the start of the lands (the freebore) is as much as half an inch - almost two calibers. I've never heard of a target rifle with that kind of freebore.
 
Paul

Kombi, I read your post on the heavy bullets AGAIN (for the third time - Pay attention Paul... ),
 
and I see that you weren't suggesting I use the 200-grain-and-over bullets in the Steyr-cased cartridges, butrather in the long-throated milsurps I have that aren't shooting the light-weight bullets well. That's a good idea. If the 195 doesn't shoot well in them, I will give those long, heavy bullets a try. Unfortunately, if the long, heavy bullets do shoot well, it will likely relegate those rifles to "the wall". I have no interest in using those heavy bullets, in that cartridge, for hunting. I am a bullet "efficiency" bigot. Lemme 'splain...
 
Just as many "ethical" hunters insist that using "premium" bullets is the "ethical" thing to do, in "small" calibers, I consider delivering the most energy I can to the animal, to be the "right" thing to do. With the exception of a few large-cased cartridges, heavy bullets rarely do that in "small" calibers. Because bullet diameter makes a BIG difference in what I call the "hammer efect", it is my opinion that heavy-for-caliber bullets are the "right" thing for "big bore" rifles.
 
In summary, in calibers smaller than .348 I think the "right" thing for a hunting cartridge is fast, flat-based, light-for-caliber bullets. In calibers larger than .338, I consider heavy-for-caliber bullets, delivering at least 2000 ft-lbs to the beast, the "right" thing.
 
The above is my opinion, and I have NO interest in foisting it on anyone else. It's the conclusion I have come to over my life's hunting and shooting experiences. At my age, I couldn't care less what Jack O'Connor, or Elmer Keith, or Bryce Towsley (ptooey), have to say on some specific matter. I base my future actions on my, personal, experience. If someone whose opinon I respect suggests something new to me, I WILL try it out. If "things" turn out as they said, I apply that first-hand experience to my future considerations. What's important, is that it is my personal experience that determines my future actions, not simply the words of even a respected friend, to say nothing of a reviled gunwriter (ptooey).
 
Sorry if the above sounds preachy, but I figured I'd draw "hostile fire" if I didn't at least try to explain my "attitude" about heavy-for-caliber bullets.
 
Paul

Hi Gitano,

   Well I can only speak from experieince with my two 6.5x55 rifles. One is a sporterised Swedish mauser made about 1905 however the barrel is of unknown vintage as it was new when  got it. fitted by some American company who sporterised the rifle or that is what I was told when I brought it. The barrel is a short one being about 22" long so I am assuming  M38 one. it's throated deep for the 160 grain bullets. I load the 160 Grn Hornady to an OAL of 3.005" and it's not touching the lands in this rifle nor the modern Mauser Obendorf M96 Slide Bolt. The Swedes still use the 156 Grn bullet for hunting in fact I have a part box of Sako factory 156 grain ammo left by a Swedish hunter and he was using it on Muntjac which only weigh about 25 lbs.

  Oh the Sportersied swede shoots best with the 120 grain Speer and IMR 4350 the Slide Bolt prefers 140 grain bullets. I have not managed to get the best accuracy with teh Hornady 129 grain bullets at yet.

Quote from: gitanoand I see that you weren't suggesting I use the 200-grain-and-over bullets in the Steyr-cased cartridges, butrather in the long-throated milsurps I have that aren't shooting the light-weight bullets well.

[/SIZE][/FONT]
Actually, I was suggesting you try the heavy pills in the long-throated 323 Steyr.
Part of my interest in trying them out.

Quote from: gitanoIn summary, in calibers smaller than .348 I think the "right" thing for a hunting cartridge is fast, flat-based, light-for-caliber bullets. In calibers larger than .338, I consider heavy-for-caliber bullets, delivering at least 2000 ft-lbs to the beast, the "right" thing.

[/SIZE][/FONT]
See, my philosophy on bullets is different.
I think I've explained this to you before but bear with me.
The 2 factors that affect my choice of bullet are bullet design and, for want of a better term, something I call accuracy reliability.
The problem with light for calibre bullets is that in almost every case they are a type of varmint or small game bullet.
Ok, so they're designed to be driven fast, but they're also often designed to be frangible and commonly have much lower ballistic coefficients than heavier and therefore longer bullets.
Add to it that a light weight bullet loses energy faster.
Now, the bullet design issue can be diregarded if you can ensure premium accuracy on every shot.
But accuracy reliability or consistency then enters the frame.
Here you have a number of factors playing a part:

• firearm
  
• ammunition
  
• weather
  
• range

But most importantly......

• The shooter!

So now you have to ask yourself

• Is my rifle always going to put the bullet exactly where I want it?
  
• Is the ammo I'm using uniform so I can depend on its accuracy?
  
• Is the weather (wind, temp, etc.) going to prevent me from putting the bullet where I need to?
  
• Can the everything work at all the ranges I may hunt at, and remember, closer may not be better.

And finally.......can I be sure every shot I make will as good as it needs to be using a lighter bullet?

While I might be able to ensure 1 and/or 2, 3 and 4 are not easy to ensure and since I know my own short comings as a marksman I think heavier bullets are more forgiving, particularly on big game.
But then my approach is from a less experienced hunter and certainly of less overall merit than yours as you have much more experience field experience and I also use non-magnums which drive bullets slower.
But I guess mostly I like the mean, brutal look of a long heavy bullet sticking out of the case.