Gunboards Forums banner

1 - 20 of 33 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
628 Posts
Discussion Starter #1 (Edited)
Oh, she's a kicker & she's loud!

I shot her for the first time today.. Argentine M91 Carbine using SF 7.65x54.

I was in standing position, open sites at 50 yards & first shot was 1/4" from bullseye, but never did I expect the percieved recoil that I got & was quite the muzzle flash too. :)

The remaining shots were scattered in loose groups, I suppose from flinch from anticipated recoil.. How do I correct that.. first time it's happened.

I need more information. If the argentine mauser is 7.65x53, why is the SF ammo 7.65x54? What's the differance in the two? If I found 7.65x53, would the percieved recoil be lower? The backward recoil to my shoulder don't really bother me, but I became concerned with the upward motion of the muzzle.

Also, I only brought 42 rounds with me to the range & 9 failed to fire.. Am I having a problem with the ammo, or do I need a new firing pin? The marks in the primer look same as the ones from fired cases, though a couple look poked lighter.

One round that failed to fire, I put it back in to try a second time & it fired, so, do you think I need a new firing pin, or is this common with this ammo?

First shot resulted in a split case at the neck.

Another shot somewhere in the middle resulted in a primer becoming entirely removed & had alot of gas blowback to my face & found remnants of the primer later when I cleaned.

The case from that one looks burned at the base.

What do you like to shoot for your argies?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
945 Posts
...brought 42 rounds with me to the range & 9 failed to fire.. Am I having a problem with the ammo, or do I need a new firing pin? The marks in the primer look same as the ones from fired cases, though a couple look poked lighter.

One round that failed to fire, I put it back in to try a second time & it fired, so, do you think I need a new firing pin, or is this common with this ammo?

First shot resulted in a split case at the neck.

Another shot somewhere in the middle resulted in a primer becoming entirely removed & had alot of gas blowback to my face & found remnants of the primer later when I cleaned.

The case from that one looks burned at the base.


The "SF" surplus ammo has well-known issues with internal corrosion. In my opinion it should NOT be used in a '91-action, primarily for the chance of a case-head separation. You were lucky with just the primer blowing out. If the case-head had let go, you might not have been able to post here for a while...


See previous thread here:
http://forums.gunboards.com/showthread.php?t=6952
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
291 Posts
my thoughts

A few of my own observations I used to shoot my 1891 carbine all the time back in the late 70`s, using norma ammo or 1940 fmap ammo never had a problem. Last few years I bought some newer surplus 1975 stuff, powder was like the 1940 stuff flake style ,but alot of it was wet inside and bullet bases were not even, then I got some of the 1980`s ammo this was worse, powder was stick and not flake it was wet and breaking down, bullet bases uneven, and alot of green corrosion inside even though it looked good on the outside. Reloading is the best option for this round, if you use norma brass you will find it is spec`d for the 1909 rifles and after you fire it in the 1891 you should neck size as the 1891`s have a chamber that is cut .010 deeper than the 1909`s I assume they did this to allow for some slop in battle and the weaker extractor design, I found this out by seeing a old chamber reamer print from 1943 from winchester, I found this to be true after ordering a go guage and it worked great for my 6 different 1891`s but wouldnt close in my 2 1909`s. aaron10
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
628 Posts
Discussion Starter #4
The "SF" surplus ammo has well-known issues with internal corrosion. In my opinion it should NOT be used in a '91-action, primarily for the chance of a case-head separation. You were lucky with just the primer blowing out. If the case-head had let go, you might not have been able to post here for a while...


See previous thread here:
http://forums.gunboards.com/showthread.php?t=6952
OH, indeed..

Glad you replied to my post before I went back to fire more.. I won't shoot this stuff anymore.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
192 Posts
These fine rifles deserve fine handloads; the last lot of SF I tried was sure-fire, but the accuracy disappointed. A lot of surplus ammo seems to get hotter as it deteriorates, so maybe that's why you got punished so badly.

Best deal on brass is Graf's, but they are out at the moment. You can form brass from 30-06, but it may need to be neck turned or neck reamed so bullets won't be pinched on chambering. Don't know if you can still get Remington 6,5x55 brass for case forming, but it doesn't require neck thinning. Winchester 6,5x55 brass will work in some rifles, but it has a slightly larger base diameter than the Remington.

As to the difference between 7,65x53 and 7,65x54, I don't think there really is any. Kinda like Russian 7,62x53 and 7,62x54. I have brass with both headstamps.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
85 Posts
I am curious about something aaron10 said. I've got two 1909's and
two 1891's, I've been a bit leary of shooting the 1891's, one has
a mismatched bolt, and the other, I just haven't gotten around to trying it.
I don't have headspace guages and have tried the tape method. But if
I understand arron10 correctly, the tape method (pieces of cellophane
on the back of cartridge cases) should make on conclude that you have
excessive headspace on 1891's, is that right?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
192 Posts
Doc, the Scotch tape method of headspace checking (which I'm not recommending, mind you) involves putting pieces on the case head one at a time until the bolt won't close. IIRC, one layer of Scotch tape is about .004" thick, so if the bolt will close on two layers, you're iffy. If it will close on three layers, you have a problem. Again, not recommending this. Try to find the correct headspace gauge.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
945 Posts
I got my 7.65X53 Arg. NOGO gage from:
JGS Precision Tool Mfg. (541) 267-4331
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
85 Posts
hmm, ok, I should give more information, when I try the scotch tape method
on my 98 Mausers it works like I suspect it should, one to two layers and
the bolt has difficulty closing. When I try it on say P-14 Enfields where
I have rimmed cartridge, this does not give the same results,
rifles. I am curious if there is something about the 1891 bolts that make
them poor candidates for doing the tape trick.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
291 Posts
Go Guage

I got my go guage from jgs too 7.65 x 53 argentine modern spec cip ,but it wouldnt close on any of my 1909`s or 1891`s so I sent it back and reordered the go guage for the 7.65 belgian mauser, it worked fine on my 1891`s they all just closed snuggly , it wouldnt close on my 1909`s on the print it shows thats the 1909`s were chambered .010 tighter so now I have another go guage coming that set up for the 1909`s. aaron10 ps they email you a spec sheet of the different prints if you ask them.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
24 Posts
Forming brass for the old Argentine using 30-06...

These fine rifles deserve fine handloads; the last lot of SF I tried was sure-fire, but the accuracy disappointed. A lot of surplus ammo seems to get hotter as it deteriorates, so maybe that's why you got punished so badly.

Best deal on brass is Graf's, but they are out at the moment. You can form brass from 30-06, but it may need to be neck turned or neck reamed so bullets won't be pinched on chambering. Don't know if you can still get Remington 6,5x55 brass for case forming, but it doesn't require neck thinning. Winchester 6,5x55 brass will work in some rifles, but it has a slightly larger base diameter than the Remington.

As to the difference between 7,65x53 and 7,65x54, I don't think there really is any. Kinda like Russian 7,62x53 and 7,62x54. I have brass with both headstamps.
I use 30-06 brass reformed and transformed to original ammo specs. for my old Argentine. I am extremely pleased with the extreme accuracy. The punishing(?) recoil you are getting seems a little peculiar to me, as I have used surplus ammo for my Argentine as well as my reloads and find it less "harsh" than most of my other milsurp WWII carbines and long gun weapons. Just my opinion. And, if you want that old gun to *really* perform, roll your own regarding the ammo, I think you will be in for a very pleasant surprise.

---MakarovManic
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
523 Posts
I bought a set of 7.65x53mm Argentine headspace gauges from Pacific Tool & Gauge, Inc. The bolts on my two Argentine 1909s wouldn't close on any of them (go, no-go & field). I had PT&G send the gauge drawings to determine the problem. I compared the PT&G drawings with the barrel drawings depicted in Webster's Argentine Mauser Rifles. The three gauges were at least .040" too long. Also, the chamber shoulder angle was off. PT&G offered to adjust the gauges. I'm going to design the new gauges from the barrel/chamber drawing in Webster's book and have PT&G adjust the gauges. After checking with several gauge makers, it appears many do not use standard or current CIP or SAAMI maximum cartridge/minimum chamber drawings to design their gauges. They don't want to pay the subscription fees. SAAMI does not have a 7.65mm Arg standard. In some cases, they used cartridge drawings downloaded from the Internet. Be careful if you just buy a no-go or field gauge. You may get a false indication of headspace. In my case, the go gauge indicated that the three gauges were not made to proper specs. Also, you should not use go, no-go & field gauges from different makers; get a complete set from from one maker. For milsurps, CIP and SAAMI specs do not always match original milspecs. An ideal set of gauges should be designed from original milspecs unless you've had your rifle chamber changed to CIP or SAAMI specs.

I don't recommend the scotch tape method for measuring headspace either.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
291 Posts
Re Tjg79

TJG79 just curious what does colin websters book show for chamber diamensions , is angle of shoulder 22 1/2 degrees or 23 degrees , My 1891 go guage that works is 1.821 with 22 1/2 degree angle on the shoulder, the one Im having adjusted is same angle but made to 1.811 for my 1909`s thats the one that matches norma ammo . Like you the first one I ordered was 1.8417 for the go and 1.8517 for the field with 23 degree thats new cip spec it was way too long. I plan on this winter doing some chamber casts from both rifles and like one of the other guys I form my brass from remington 6.5 x 55 for these rifles it saves you from the base bulge. Aaron10
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
68 Posts
I bought a set of 7.65x53mm Argentine headspace gauges from Pacific Tool & Gauge, Inc. The bolts on my two Argentine 1909s wouldn't close on any of them (go, no-go & field). I had PT&G send the gauge drawings to determine the problem. I compared the PT&G drawings with the barrel drawings depicted in Webster's Argentine Mauser Rifles. The three gauges were at least .040" too long. Also, the chamber shoulder angle was off. PT&G offered to adjust the gauges. I'm going to design the new gauges from the barrel/chamber drawing in Webster's book and have PT&G adjust the gauges. After checking with several gauge makers, it appears many do not use standard or current CIP or SAAMI maximum cartridge/minimum chamber drawings to design their gauges. They don't want to pay the subscription fees. SAAMI does not have a 7.65mm Arg standard. In some cases, they used cartridge drawings downloaded from the Internet. Be careful if you just buy a no-go or field gauge. You may get a false indication of headspace. In my case, the go gauge indicated that the three gauges were not made to proper specs. Also, you should not use go, no-go & field gauges from different makers; get a complete set from from one maker. For milsurps, CIP and SAAMI specs do not always match original milspecs. An ideal set of gauges should be designed from original milspecs unless you've had your rifle chamber changed to CIP or SAAMI specs.

I don't recommend the scotch tape method for measuring headspace either.
Just wondering what happened with the rework from Pacific? I just received a set from them and I don't think the were made to the proper specs. GO gauge won't close on any Argentine 1891 or 1909. Even the NO-GO feels to tight to be giving a proper reading.
 

·
Diamond+ Bullet Member
Joined
·
1,632 Posts
'SF" arsenal 7.65 Argentine ammo

I've been shooting "SF" 7.65 Argentine ammo dated 1975 and 1980 for years with no problems whatsoever....


It's all been sure fire and accurate...... Hell, I still have 700 rds of it...... My Argies love it.

Maybe the stuff you guys had was an anomoly......?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
945 Posts
Here's photos of some "SF 75" cartridges cut lengthwise. The corrosion can "weld" the bullet to the case, causing excessively high pressures.





 

·
Diamond+ Bullet Member
Joined
·
1,632 Posts
Hmmmmm...

HMMMMM! I'm gonna have to pull a few and check this out....

I don't doubt you... Just never had an issue.... I'll let you know what I found....


At the very least, lol I have 700 bullets to use. When life gives you lemons...... MAKE lemonade!

GRINS
 
1 - 20 of 33 Posts
Top