Gunboards Forums banner

1 - 8 of 8 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,029 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
My brother purchased a really nice, all-matching Argentine yesterday. Is Norma 7.65 Argentine ammunition safe to shoot in it? Thanks. dj
 

·
Silver Bullet member
Joined
·
1,354 Posts
If it is a M1909 (1898 style) Mauser, made in Germany, Norma manufactured ammunition should be perfectly safe. The key is "Norma Manufactured", and not components reloaded by some unknown person . Because Norma ammunition is top of the line stuff, it is expensive. It is also not common. People (myself included) reload Norma cartridge cases when they become available. There always should be question about the safety of reloads that you buy. at a gun show or a flea market.
The 1891 Series of Argentine rifles probably would do fine with Norma ammunition, but it would be well to have a reputable gunsmith check a gun of that type over before firing it with any type of ammunition.
That is my opinion.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
137 Posts
I believe that Norma ammunition would be fine in any weapon so chambered. Standard pressure data has always been available to mfg.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,255 Posts
Odd that this post came at this time. Not looking to hijack this thread but my issue seems pertinent. I've been shooting an 1891 Enginer Carbine for awhile with the soft point ammo that came with the gun. No issues and very accurate. Then a guy needed some ammo to hunt with. His long Lowe had been sporterised many moons ago but scope went south. So sighting in and hunting used up what I had left. But, no problem says I, I've got several boxs of Norma hunting ammo in two different bullet weights. So when I loaded up a stripper and loaded the magazine like always, imagine my suprise when the first round hung up trying to exit the magazine. The body of the case just back of the shoulder is just too big to slide up and out and into battery. Rounds fit the chamber fine, just won't feed from the mag. I've set everything aside for the time being as other things are front burner but just asking if anyone else has seen this with Norma in their Argentines?
Carbine is a C block DWM.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,716 Posts
Back when the 1891's first came out, you had two choices when it came to ammo. Either Argentine military surplus from Interarms or Norma. I used Norma which was expensive back then and still is today. Still have some once fired brass made by Norma. Never had a problem with feeding or extraction with either the surplus or Norma. Back then listed muzzle velocity on the box was 2900 or so feet per second. That was with the 150 grain bullet. Right up there with the 30-06.
Norma never made any distinction wether it was to be used in either the 1891 or 1909 models. You may want to check the side walls of the magazine to see if they have been forced inwards. Some of their owners do that if the follower pushes rounds up and out of the magazine. Either that or your magazine at the front is sitting too low and hits the edge of the feed ramp on the receiver. And check the action screws to make sure that they are tight. Loose screws can lower the magazine slightly causing the cartridge hitting the bottom edge of the feed ramp. Bought a sporterized 1891 years back. gent did a great job glass bedding the action. And also the magazine/trigger guard assembly. Unfortunately that lowered the mag which showed the cartridge hitting the bottom of the feed ramp. Had to remove the glass bedding to raise up the trigger guard/magazine. After that it was fine. Frank
 

·
Gold Bullet member
Joined
·
11,428 Posts
I've been accumulating boxes of PPU to eventually take one of the Argentines to the range (and to reload as many times as possible). I can still find it and I understand it's fairly decent. Appreciate any feedback on PPU in either 1891 or 1909 (both long or carbine). I have mostly FMJ but some soft point too. I'd imagine the FMJ will do better, as I think they're closer to the original 7.65x53 load.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,633 Posts
I am no expert, but I figured that the PPU FMJ would be best in the 1909 and the PPU soft nose 180 grain best in the 1891. The original bullet for the 1891 was some 200 grains and quite long. I recently posted some pictures comparing the bullets along with the Hornady 174 grain RN bullets that are said to be pretty good in the 1891's. Unlike the RN ..284 inch bullets for 7x57, the .312 inch bullets from Hornady have not been discontinued, although I bet they are hard to find now. Seems that the PPU 7.65x53 ammo is unpopular enough to be still around while the 7mm and 8 mm seems to be mostly gone.

I compared the price for the PPU ammo with buying the brass and decided that for the extra 40 cents it was better to buy the ammo, shoot it to form the brass to my rifle, then neck size to load the RN bullets.

Here is the other thread. The posts with the bullets are around number 26.

 

·
Gold Bullet member
Joined
·
11,428 Posts
Thanks, JoeACTM. I also came to the conclusion that buying loaded PPU would be best. I may try shooting a benched group with each type during the same range trip, just to see if there is any difference. When it comes time to handload, I'll have to do some research on what bullets to use.
 
1 - 8 of 8 Posts
Top