Joined
·
59 Posts
Experts, Do you think these rifles are dangerous without the 98 bolt features?? Jim,
![Gun Rifle Firearm Trigger Air gun]()
Chiliean M 1895 pre 98 bolt features
1 - 8 of 8 Posts
Jim - In a word, No. There isn't any question that the Model 98 design features are an improvement in strength and gas handling. That said, none of the countries using them tossed them into the scrap pile upon seeing the updated design. They just took advantage of the newer design available when buying more rifles. (I'm still shooting my obsolete 1893/5's).
+1 Alkali.
No expert but,
These were very well manufactured and fitted rifles at the time. Barring any beyond normal wear, and good headspace, there shouldn't be any problem. Besides, most modern ammo off the shelf is less powerful than surplus.
BTW, nice looking rifle. More pics. ?
No expert but,
These were very well manufactured and fitted rifles at the time. Barring any beyond normal wear, and good headspace, there shouldn't be any problem. Besides, most modern ammo off the shelf is less powerful than surplus.
BTW, nice looking rifle. More pics. ?
Joined
·
61 Posts
While the 98 is absolutely the better system, the pre-98s were nevertheless well-engineered and manufactured.
With good headspace and in good condition, they are perfectly safe to use with moderate loads. That said, I avoid surplus ammo due to the inferior gas venting.
However, examples that have been rechambered (in the M1895's case, to 7.62x51) are questionable from the get-go due to the methods used.
Is that a Spanish sight on the rifle?
With good headspace and in good condition, they are perfectly safe to use with moderate loads. That said, I avoid surplus ammo due to the inferior gas venting.
However, examples that have been rechambered (in the M1895's case, to 7.62x51) are questionable from the get-go due to the methods used.
Is that a Spanish sight on the rifle?
Joined
·
59 Posts
stg 44, This is in 7x57 which I wanted and like very much. First one I have had, wanted a carbine. I shot it few times, think it is accurate. The rifle is mostly a mix-master, with a nice bore. The rear sight is well mounted in the upper wood band and goes from 4 to 20. It has 4 digit number on the elevator sight that do not match receiver, as does not much else. There is a small triangle with a circle inside on a post on the base of the sight. Glad you think it is adequate. I won't shoot it much if ever, only have new off the shelf ammo. Would like little better carbine in 7x57. Thanks Jim,
Joined
·
59 Posts
gun shy & Alkali, Yeah, about what I thought, was just some conserned agout geting something back in the face. Never heard much about really. It is a nice mild recoil round. Used somewhat around here for deer in newer rifles yet. Thanks for pitching in. Jim,
![Gun Rifle Firearm Shotgun Trigger]()
![]()
Joined
·
61 Posts
The floorplate appears to be Turkish, and the rear sight slider appears Spanish, but it's hard to tell. They're still 93 Mauser parts (of which the 95 is an offshoot), though, so it doesn't really matter from a functional standpoint.
If headspace is OK, I wouldn't hesitate to shoot it with anything short of hot loads. My 1895 Chileno Infantry Rifle is one of my best shooters- easily puts 5 shots under 1" at 50 yards.
Edit: I forgot to mention the glasses! I recommend always wearing shooting glasses, but I emphasize it even more so with these due to their early stage of gas shielding.
If headspace is OK, I wouldn't hesitate to shoot it with anything short of hot loads. My 1895 Chileno Infantry Rifle is one of my best shooters- easily puts 5 shots under 1" at 50 yards.
Edit: I forgot to mention the glasses! I recommend always wearing shooting glasses, but I emphasize it even more so with these due to their early stage of gas shielding.
1 - 8 of 8 Posts
