404 Jeffery Build on a standard action ??

[SwampTrooper]

The 416 Rem box will be longer than your standard length action's follower. I know guys have made the shorter standard action follower work but having a follower full length is more asthetic and keeps stuff from falling down inside the box over the opening above end of follower. The military follower spring in my action didn't mate up well to the magnum follower and I had to modify it (follower) slightly. I can walk you through it if you decide to go that route. All you need is a vice and patience. I expect the longer magnum follower would require less modification to handle much thicker 404 cartridges. I don't know for sure because I didn't try modifying the standard length follower.

Ask away. Remember, I've only built the one gun. I don't know everything ... yet ... but I'm working on it. There's lots of guys on here who are more experienced.

Ahhh magnum follower, that makes perfect sense! Yes I'll see. It'll be trial and error as the standard follower may work but also may cause nose dives. Unfortunately I'm not your neighbor, though that would be cool and I would love to visit Tim Horton's some day. I was just doing general research online on the 404 conversion and came across your write-up on the Ontario page. I really enjoyed reading it as it made the project seem actually feasible. There is not too much online about the build. Your write-up was the most complete I found. Then by happenstance, I saw this thread. Both here and in the Ontario shooters assoc page you mention the 416 rem bottom metal, and you both have Ontario in your name so I just put two and two together. We've actually interacted before when you gave me some advice on a Mauser flag safety and cocking piece a while ago. I smiled when I realized you were the same person who built the 404. It really is a small world online, at least in the 404 gunmaking community

 

[Ontario Hunter]

It's an easier conversion than Duane Wiebe's booklet which is for 375 build. 375 is longer than 404 and requires relieving metal from the locking ring to allow for ejection of loaded cartridges. Also his advice for carving the feeding rails in "flame" shape didn't apply to my conversion. Not sure why but I was able to shape rails in a more conventional line. Must have something to do with 404's gently sloping shoulder.

Modifying the extractor claw is just as tricky as rails. Wiebe's guidance was crucial. I still couldn't get mine to snap over reliably after following his instructions to the point of no return re removing metal. Then I discovered the spring tension on my extractor was too stiff. I carefully reshaped it to remove enough tension to allow snap over. Then the bolt face also picked up cartridges from the magazine much more smoothly. Also discovered some of the problem was due to inconsistent rim thickness of RWS brass. Hornady brass is much better.

 

[Grumpy gumpy]

This is a standard Mauser converted to 404.
First picture is the jig to hold the bolt in a four jaw chunk to work on the bolt face, bolt goes in the v blocks in the jig and is clamped down and then centred on the firing pin hole, it must be square and true or things get messy.
2) The jig to securely hold the receiver to mill out the bottom to suit the reworked bottom metal
3)A couple of bottom metals , a standard 8x57 and one that I had started for another job, the enlarged one is still very rough, needs a lot more work to be close to acceptable. I moved the 404 one back another 3 -4 mm by machining a piece of metal to suit as opposed to the one in the picture which which has just had the centre of the rear of the mag well cut out and a piece of flat steel brazed onto the back, this was to have an oberndorf style leaver fitted. The 404 one on my rifle is made wider to hold three down at the moment, doesn’t quite hold four down, it will if I remove the follower
4) Shows the receiver opening, I removed as much metal as I could from the back to leave as much as I could at the front, the rear notch for loading was basically just the stripper clip groove removed , you can see where the previous owner of the receiver had had the rear scope base mounted too far forward and was just on the edge of the slot, I had to drill another hole to take the rear modified base. (I’ve just got the front one on at the moment as I was trying a red dot)
5) The standard floor plate on my 404, I will at some stage make a deeper floor plate to hold the follower down further allowing the extra round for four down. I may remake this and extend it like I did on my 8x68S
6)This picture shows how much I removed from the modified bolt stop and ejector
I will try to get time to pull the action out of the stock to show how much metal was removed from the rear of the underside of the receiver
Gumpy

 

[SwampTrooper]

View attachment 747469View attachment 747470View attachment 747471View attachment 747472View attachment 747473View attachment 747474
This is a standard Mauser converted to 404.
First picture is the jig to hold the bolt in a four jaw chunk to work on the bolt face, bolt goes in the v blocks in the jig and is clamped down and then centred on the firing pin hole, it must be square and true or things get messy.
2) The jig to securely hold the receiver to mill out the bottom to suit the reworked bottom metal
3)A couple of bottom metals , a standard 8x57 and one that I had started for another job, the enlarged one is still very rough, needs a lot more work to be close to acceptable. I moved the 404 one back another 3 -4 mm by machining a piece of metal to suit as opposed to the one in the picture which which has just had the centre of the rear of the mag well cut out and a piece of flat steel brazed onto the back, this was to have an oberndorf style leaver fitted. The 404 one on my rifle is made wider to hold three down at the moment, doesn’t quite hold four down, it will if I remove the follower
4) Shows the receiver opening, I removed as much metal as I could from the back to leave as much as I could at the front, the rear notch for loading was basically just the stripper clip groove removed , you can see where the previous owner of the receiver had had the rear scope base mounted too far forward and was just on the edge of the slot, I had to drill another hole to take the rear modified base. (I’ve just got the front one on at the moment as I was trying a red dot)
5) The standard floor plate on my 404, I will at some stage make a deeper floor plate to hold the follower down further allowing the extra round for four down. I may remake this and extend it like I did on my 8x68S
6)This picture shows how much I removed from the modified bolt stop and ejector
I will try to get time to pull the action out of the stock to show how much metal was removed from the rear of the underside of the receiver
Gumpy

Interesting! You relived the back end of the receiver as well. I think Ontario only relived the front if I am not mistaken to accommodate Magnum bottom metal. Either way, extremely useful. Like I said there really is not much info out there on how the conversion is actually done.

 

[Grumpy gumpy]

Interesting! You relived the back end of the receiver as well. I think Ontario only relived the front if I am not mistaken to accommodate Magnum bottom metal. Either way, extremely useful. Like I said there really is not much info out there on how the conversion is actually done.

Mine wasn’t a factory magnum bottom metal, it was a standard mag well and bottom metal, I made the mag well internally longer, that way I could increase the length rearward without having to touch the exterior of the metal. I have made them externally longer before but it’s a lot of work for not much gain.
Gumpy

 

[Ontario Hunter]

Interesting! You relived the back end of the receiver as well. I think Ontario only relived the front if I am not mistaken to accommodate Magnum bottom metal. Either way, extremely useful. Like I said there really is not much info out there on how the conversion is actually done.

I didn't relieve either the front or back receiver ejection port. Look at Weibe's booklet. I removed a bit of the  inside of rear ring on ejection side. That provided sufficient clearance to eject fatter 404 cartridges. But be careful to not cut too much too far back. Stay away from the extractor's track. Otherwise the extractor will spin when the bolt is turned and gun jams. I did not modify either bolt stop or ejector. It's not necessary with 404. A rifle with unmodified ejector/bolt stop, locking ring, and ejection port has just enough clearance to eject standard OAL 404 cartridges past the unmodified locking ring. Perhaps longer 450 gr round nose solids might not make it but none of those will ever be shot from this rifle. Just not necessary. 400 gr modern tech bullets will kill anything. I didn't remove the stripper slot. Again, not necessary. 416 Rem mag box is a bit narrow but I can still push a fourth cartridge under the extractor claw with chamber open. It is longer box obviously but I don't believe the rear was moved back.

Remember, Jeffery only had standard length Mauser to work with in 1905. He opened the bolt face, changed the mag box length and width, moved the ramp forward, and modified the extractor. From everything I've read, the ejection port was not modified, nor did he relocate the bolt stop or ejector.

 

[Ontario Hunter]

Mine wasn’t a factory magnum bottom metal, it was a standard mag well and bottom metal, I made the mag well internally longer, that way I could increase the length rearward without having to touch the exterior of the metal. I have made them externally longer before but it’s a lot of work for not much gain.
Gumpy

Okay, that answers some questions. By moving the rear end plate of the mag box back and stretching the front of the box forward a bit, you were able to make do with the old standard box. But moving the rear end of the box back required changing the bolt stop and ejector, moving them back too. And opening the rear of the ejection port would also be necessary. Looks like a lot of work just to avoid rebuilding the mag box. Gotta do what ya gotta do with import restrictions to Australia.

 

[Grumpy gumpy]

Interesting! You relived the back end of the receiver as well. I think Ontario only relived the front if I am not mistaken to accommodate Magnum bottom metal. Either way, extremely useful. Like I said there really is not much info out there on how the conversion is actually done.

I may have partly misunderstood your comment, I machined metal from the back of the underside of the receiver, about 5 mm, to move the cartridge position backwards, you can just see faint marks where I reformed the rear area in the last photo. I will try to get time to pull it apart so it makes more sense
Gumpy

 

[foxtrot1]

Awesome work!

I haven't looked at a interarms mark x 375 to see how much material was removed, but I've never heard any issues with their performance.

Here's an original 404 showing how much metal was removed

 

[Ontario Hunter]

The camera function is unfortunately kaput on my phone right now. I have seen the original 404 images before. The sides of the magazine box were cut away and just the wood used to hold the cartridges. The back end mag plate was placed at the standard bolt stop. That's where my 416 Rem mag box end also stops. Presumably the original 8mm box's end plate was situated there too because that's where the ejector is activated. The bolt stop and ejector on "original 404" were not modified, as mine are also not modified. For whatever reason Jeffery opted to cut back the ejection port. I'm thinking this was simply because the stripper clip slot was cut out. Perhaps the thinking was removing that side of the receiver below the cutout slot made it easier to load the magazine. Maybe a little bit easier. I drop my cartridges into the open receiver and slide them back slightly to the bolt face as I depress into the magazine. Anyway, if I had to reload that gun in a hurry, I wouldn't be worried about depressing under the feeding rails. Just drop a round in the open chamber and close the bolt: snap over. And I agree with Duane Weibe: a DGR that won't snap over isn't a proper DGR. My 404 retained the stripper clip slot and it loads just fine. If cutting away the side of receiver to extend the ejection port (not necessary), again be careful not to cut back too far or the extractor will become free to rotate with the bolt = jammed action. If you do cut too far, the problem can be fixed by switching to a magnum extractor. Good luck finding one of those!

 

[Grumpy gumpy]

This is an extended floor plate on my 8x68S
The first arrow shows where the hinge point metal has been extended 6mm
Second shows the mag well front shoulders moved forward and the floor plate edges moved up as well.
Third shows the rear of the floor plate where I added metal to the mag well and the floor plate to square it up a bit as the steel was very thin due to moving the rear wall of the mag well back. This assembly holds cartridges 92.5 mm long with a bit of play and allows cartridges to be removed from the bottom unlike a lot of these conversions
I was having a lot of issues with undercutting as the metal was not the best quality and welding it was difficult
Gumpy

 

[Ontario Hunter]

Awesome work!

I haven't looked at a interarms mark x 375 to see how much material was removed, but I've never heard any issues with their performance.

Here's an original 404 showing how much metal was removed

I'm not sure that is an "original 404." I have seen similar images before but there is something wrong with this one. Look closely and you can see the back end of the extractor when the bolt has closed. That's because whoever did this upgrade sawed away too much of the receiver when they removed the stripper clip slot. In that photo the extractor has clearly left its guide in the rear of receiver ... because that part of the receiver has been ground off. The end of the extractor should not be visible when the bolt is closed. Now when the bolt is lifted to open the chamber, the extractor will rotate with it = bolt will be jammed in the closed position because extractor is not in its channel. Can be fixed by switching to a magnum length extractor. Because magnum extractor is longer its back end will not leave what remains of its channel in the receiver.

 

[Ontario Hunter]

I'm not sure that is an "original 404." I have seen similar images before but there is something wrong with this one. Look closely and you can see the back end of the extractor when the bolt has closed. That's because whoever did this upgrade sawed away too much of the receiver when they removed the stripper clip slot. In that photo the extractor has clearly left its guide in the rear of receiver ... because that part of the receiver has been ground off. The end of the extractor should not be visible when the bolt is closed. Now when the bolt is lifted to open the chamber, the extractor will rotate with it = bolt will be jammed in the closed position because extractor is not in its channel. Can be fixed by switching to a magnum length extractor. Because magnum extractor is longer its back end will not leave what remains of its channel in the receiver.

Edit: I'm wrong. By the time the front of the extractor leaves the locking ring, the back end of the extractor will have reentered what's left of the extractor channel at rear of ejector port. I was following Weibe's warning in his booklet but it is for 375 conversion, not 404. Because 375 is much longer, the locking ring must be trimmed to allow loaded cartridges to eject. If the locking ring is shortened, the extractor will leave its channel on that end earlier, perhaps too early for the back end of extractor to find its rebated channel at that end. My 404's extractor jumps back 1/4" when the bolt is only lifted. And the front end of extractor remains in the locking ring channel for an additional 7/16". Plenty of time for the back end of extractor to find its channel at that end of the ejection port.

However, I'm thinking a Mauser action would be much smoother cycling if the extractor is not out of its channel at the back of receiver at any time.

 

[BlueFlyer]

I know it is accedemic as you need to have a chambered barrel, but it is a lot easier to make a 416WSM on a standard action. And with a 400grn doing 2250fps (chronographed) that is 100fps faster than the original 404J ballistics - I don't think anything receiving the bullet would know the difference.
I am enjoying this thread, so keep going, it is totally achieveable.

 

[SwampTrooper]

I know it is accedemic as you need to have a chambered barrel, but it is a lot easier to make a 416WSM on a standard action. And with a 400grn doing 2250fps (chronographed) that is 100fps faster than the original 404J ballistics - I don't think anything receiving the bullet would know the difference.
I am enjoying this thread, so keep going, it is totally achieveable.

Honestly one could do 9.3x62, or .375 Ruger or even .416 Ruger and it would be a lot easier. I already have a magnum length .375 H&H so I am making this project just to have fun and a historically interesting/ classic safari romantic project. That being said someone really should buy some of these old Mauser actions and make accessible dangerous game rifles. All in all you could make one for a lot cheaper than the other offerings and they look straight out of the golden age of Safari.

 

[Ontario Hunter]

I know it is accedemic as you need to have a chambered barrel, but it is a lot easier to make a 416WSM on a standard action. And with a 400grn doing 2250fps (chronographed) that is 100fps faster than the original 404J ballistics - I don't think anything receiving the bullet would know the difference.
I am enjoying this thread, so keep going, it is totally achieveable.

416 WSM? I searched hard and could find almost nothing about this cartridge. Couldn't find any ammo for sale. Rim is almost same diameter as 404 so bolt face opening is same. 404 builds on a standard action easily enough. I don't see any advantage. I'm shooting 400 gr 404J at 2200 fps and it's plenty recoil for me. I'm not into sectional density calculations but won't the thicker bullet perform better?

 

[SwampTrooper]

416 WSM? I searched hard and could find almost nothing about this cartridge. Couldn't find any ammo for sale. Rim is almost same diameter as 404 so bolt face opening is same. 404 builds on a standard action easily enough. I don't see any advantage. I'm shooting 400 gr 404J at 2200 fps and it's plenty recoil for me. I'm not into sectional density calculations but won't the thicker bullet perform better?

I feel .416 Ruger would be much easier to build but I have concerns about longevity of the cartridge. It doesn’t have the romance of 404 which is the entire point of the build. But the price is about double that of the.416 Ruger per round and it the purchase of magnum bottom metal is roughly the price of a custom barrel alone…

 

[Ontario Hunter]

I feel .416 Ruger would be much easier to build but I have concerns about longevity of the cartridge. It doesn’t have the romance of 404 which is the entire point of the build. But the price is about double that of the.416 Ruger per round and it the purchase of magnum bottom metal is roughly the price of a custom barrel alone…

I paid $400 for my bottom metal. Barrel was $410 + $600 for a gunsmith to cut, crown, ream, thread and mount it in the gun (I brought it to him as a 30-06 to get around cross-border restrictions on gun parts trafficking).

 

[SwampTrooper]

I paid $400 for my bottom metal. Barrel was $410 + $600 for a gunsmith to cut, crown, ream, thread and mount it in the gun (I brought it to him as a 30-06 to get around cross-border restrictions on gun parts trafficking).

The barrel I can source from Lothar around 400 crowned and short chambered. I can ream, headspace, mount and blue myself. Then it’s about 400 more for the bottom metal, gunsmith fees for opening the bolt head. Then NECG express rifle fittings let’s say another 300 but I can at least solder them myself. Then there’s stocking which I also do myself but still can be anything really from 300-1,000 depending on grade or how crazy I want to go. I don’t do checkering so that will have to go out, that’s another $250. I got the G98 Mauser action for $450. All together this gun will be around $2200 all in counting bits and bobs. Making it 416 Ruger would save about $400. That’s the difference which isn’t so much in the scheme of it but also isn’t insignificant. Still, $2200 is about the cheapest 404 Jeff in the world.

 

[Ontario Hunter]

The barrel I can source from Lothar around 400 crowned and short chambered. I can ream, headspace, mount and blue myself. Then it’s about 400 more for the bottom metal, gunsmith fees for opening the bolt head. Then NECG express rifle fittings let’s say another 300 but I can at least solder them myself. Then there’s stocking which I also do myself but still can be anything really from 300-1,000 depending on grade or how crazy I want to go. I don’t do checkering so that will have to go out, that’s another $250. I got the G98 Mauser action for $450. All together this gun will be around $2200 all in counting bits and bobs. Making it 416 Ruger would save about $400. That’s the difference which isn’t so much in the scheme of it but also isn’t insignificant. Still, $2200 is about the cheapest 404 Jeff in the world.

Yep. That's cheap. I have about $2700 in my 404 but that includes two stocks, $150 for bluing, a hundred bucks to the machinist for opening the bolt face, and $150 for used Winchester Express sights that I could have drilled and tapped myself but the gunsmith who mounted my barrel offered to do it if I donated my drill and taps (his were worn out). The Parkwest Model 70 safety and shroud was $200 and QD Warne rings on clearance for $65. I think I paid $300 Canadian for the M98 donor action with bolt handle modified for scope. Still need to upgrade the recoil pad.

Building a 404 was never going to be cheap ... or easy. I knew that. But the end product is mine, not some soulless assembly line piece of metal and wood. It is a reflection of a man from a bygone era when people did things for themselves. When they searched for challenges to conquer and accomplished them without weighing costs.