Many of these conversions were done on '93 or '95 actions - at least the ones I've seen, though some were no doubt done on later Spanish manufactured '98s. All, I would venture to say, were intended to be fired with the Spanish 7.62x51CETME cartridge - which their CETME service rifles and LMGs were chambered and stressed for, but which worked at lower pressure - and I believe had a lighter projectile - than 7.62x51NATO. Dimensions of the cartridge cases are identical. The fact that many of the refurbed Spanish 7.62 Mausers have been advertised as pre-'98 antiques, no FFL required etc. would indicate there a lot of the less than desirable conversions out there. Hop on Wikipedia, enter 7.62x51mm CETME (as opposed to NATO) cartridge, and you'll get the rundown on this particular round.
Short p.s. to previous: yes, the Spanish '93s and '95s were originally 7x57mm.
i can't find out alot on the 1916. I can't tell if the 1916 was a CONVERSION of an 93, or if the 1916 were new production made like the 93 but shorter, but still in 7x57, ten converted to 762x51
the samco add is not listing them as antique.. but deffinately cr or ffl
i can't find out alot on the 1916. I can't tell if the 1916 was a CONVERSION of an 93, or if the 1916 were new production made like the 93 but shorter, but still in 7x57, ten converted to 762x51
the samco add is not listing them as antique.. but deffinately cr or ffl
Hop on Google and enter Spanish 1895/1916 Cavalry Carbine.
p.s. Better yet, Google Spanish FR-7 and FR-8 Mausers. That'll bring up a series of discussions regarding the safety of the FR-7 conversions, which started life as 93/16 cavalry and civil guard carbines in 7x57mm, and also notes that the FR-8 was a conversion of the '98 - quite suitable for the 7.62x51mm NATO round.
hmm.. my google-fo on my phone is limioted. but i read a few articles on 93 and 95 actions being updated, as well as 1916 actions all being updated from 20-thru 50's for garda civil. and yeah.. that would be the cetme chambering..
no books with me.. am wondering what the pressure diff is from 7x57 to 76s cetme, to 76s nato to 308 win. ( ie. chamber dimension and max safe.. )
hmm
price is attractive.. but i don't think i need something i could never fire. don't think ive ever seen 762 cetme for sale,,
I did, decades ago when the first CETME sporters hit the market. If you Google CETME Rifle, take a look at specs for the Modelo A and A1, which give a brief rundown on the reduced charge and projectile weight 7.62x51mmCETME cartridges.
I have a CAI sporter, which is the late model based one that is safe for 308 win and nato... hadn't even thought about the early 50's light projectile ones.
i guess if i got one of those conversion rifles.. I'd have to trailboss it.
hmm....
sad since samco is telling people that can hunt with them....
there is a guy that always comes to the local flea market that has a box with 10 g3 mags ( black anodized? ) that he wants 20$ for.
I only go once a month to get bird feed for my parrots, but i always see that box and wonder if they fit my gun, and then by the time i get home I never remember to research it.
The '09 Argentine would make a great .308 - they're '98 actions. The 1916s are 1895/1916 cavalry and civil guard carbines, stressed for the lower pressure 7x57mm, and in later years for the lower pressure/lighter projectile 7.62x51mm CETME round.
You see these come up from time-to-time. I'm not sure how anyone can sell these as 'safe' with 7.62X51 Nato or .308 Winchester ammunition. I know it would be pricey - and maybe not economical to do - but if I still had one I think I'd be awfully tempted to rebarrel it to 7mm. They can be loaded down to CETME pressures, but I'd be affraid of it ending up in someone's hands who didn't understand the pressure limits of the receiver and only 2 forward locking lugs.
wasn't 7.62 nato originally measured in crusherguns with CUP where 308 winchester was tranducer method psi? Or was it the other way around? I fire 308 through my 1916 with no problems. Accuracy is good, no ruptured primers or case lengthening. The recoil is easy to manage as well. Overall its a stout little carbine!
Warriflefan - not picking an arguement with you. The fact is that while your rifle will chamber and fire 7.62mm NATO and .308 Winchester caliber ammo, it really may not be the world's greatest idea to do it. Your rifle was built to fire a much lower pressure round. The steel is OLD and the steel - even when it was new - was produced in a country not especially famous for the highest standards of weapons grade steel. The design of the rifle itself - haveing only the two forward locking lugs on the bolt - all makes the idea of firing high pressure loads questionable.
I thought forward locking lugs were better for higher pressures...like in the swiss rubin 1911 vs k31...maybe not. Heres an interesting link for an article relating the old cup "psi" vs modern real transducer psi. euro psi is different from american psi too I think. I'm still now sure if its safe or not, but ive never had a single issue firing 308 through it. I guess you can always have a gunsmith take a test the metal's hardness if you want extra piece of mind.
Twin forward locling lugs on the bolt were intended to make the action safer than a single lug. But the third lug - as on the improved Mauser action (the 98) was added for safety, It was added just in case the first two sheared off, and helped to support the bolt. The twin lugs are just fine for the 45,000 PSI of the old 7mm loads - assuming that all else is in order and there are no bolt or receiver cracks.
Just for grins and giggles, I had a sporterized '93 years ago in the original 7X57 Mauser caliber. I had the bolt handle bent for a scope. The gunsmith who worked on it inletted the action for the scope handle and created a '3rd" safety lug. I always thought that was a great idea on that action.
A third lug sounds like a great idea! I know the topic of shooting 308 through these has been discussed at length with the 2 sides coming down to those that shoot it through them and those that don't feel safe doing it. I lifted this from wikipedia.
"While CUP and LUP numbers were intended to be comparable to the crushing power of a given pressure in psi, the numbers are not equivalent. Since a longer duration, lower pressure pulse can crush the cylinder as much as a shorter duration, higher pressure pulse, CUP and LUP pressures frequently register lower than actual peak pressures (as measured by a transducer) by up to 20%."
I'd love to know for sure myself. The 1916 does have a gas port which I know will at least slow the bolt as it shoots backwards towards my face! http://masterton.us/Unmarked1916
Hop on Google Image and enter Spanish 1916 .308 Mauser. Scroll through the images and you'll find several Chilean (Steyr made) and Spanish 7X57 Mauser to 7.62x51 Nato conversions that've let go.
Perhaps someone like Old Western Scrounger might have it, but if you can locate any of the 7.62x51CETME (as opposed to NATO) trounds imported with the first series of CETME Sporters they'd be perfectly safe for the Spanish 1916.
Specs for the 7.62 CETME were a 112.5-113 gr. spitzer bullet @2490-2600fps. Forward portion of the bullet was plastic cored to achieve length while keeping the weight low.
I winder if a steel cor'ed projective could be used to dupe that weight to size ratio.. hmmm
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Related Threads
?
?
?
?
?
The Firearms Forum
2.2M posts
71K members
Since 2003
A forum community dedicated to all firearm owners and enthusiasts. Come join the discussion about optics, hunting, gunsmithing, styles, reviews, accessories, classifieds, and more!