New to Me Mannlicher Schoenauer 6.5x54

The gent I bought it from just gave me a box of 50 loaded cartridges (he'd handloaded). They are Norma brass with Hawk 160gr round nose soft points. They don't feed right. If you push the bolt slowly, it just locks up. You have to slam the bolt rapidly to get it to close.

I measured the overall length against Brian's drawing above. These are 2.9" instead of 3.06". The tip of the bullet is on the feed ramp. Is that 1/6 of an inch being short enough to mess up the feeding to this extent?

I was happy that he brought me some loaded cartridges. But I was a bit shocked that they don't slide in like they're greased. I was expecting it to be buttery smooth. Is it the length?

I just took these two pictures to include so it might help. The one on the left is as the round pops up at the top of the magazine. The one on the right is when I push the bolt foward and the tip of the magazine hits the ramp and just stops.

If I smack it hard and fast, it'll jump up the ramp and into the chamber. But if I push the bolt at a normal speed, the tip of the bullet hits the ramp and stops.

The ramp is sloped where the tip hits....so I'm not sure what's up here....
Until discussion came up about the 6.5X54, I never ever even heard of a feeding problem with the other calibers in a MS. Sure enough, the6.5 is finicky about long round noses vs shorter pointed bullets. I have the problem of "bump it hard and it will feed" using Privi ammunition. But my 30'06 and 7X57? Smooth as silk with everything.
 
Well, the plot thickens. I'm not 100% sure what's going on yet, but I almost suspect this rifle has a tight chamber. I have cases that Tom gave me (the owner I bought it from) that he had resized and I mic'd them. They seemed pretty much right on the money with the exception that the overall case length was about 9-10/1000th's short. But I dropped one into the chamber and I had to cam the bolt down noticeably hard. It didn't just close. I tried another and it was the same way. As well, the already loaded ones he gave me were the same way. So I set up my new RCBS resizing die, and ran a couple of the empty Norma cases he gave me through them. Full length resized them. Put them under the digital calipers and to the best I could measure, the dimensions were pretty well right on the money to Brian's drawing above except, it looks like he'd trimmed them just a hair short. But I wouldn't think 9-10/1000's off the case mouth ahead of the shoulder would matter that much. I still had to cam them down to get the bolt shut. I then loaded a 160gr Hawk round nose bullet into the case. First attempt I had trouble getting the seating die set up properly....and got it about 10/1000's too short. It would feed, but I still had to push a bit. Took the bullet puller and pulled it out and reseated it to 10/1000's long and tried it. It fed well, but then got stuck in the chamber. It stuck when I tried to pull the bolt out. I muscled the bolt back and it pulled the bullet out and left it in the chamber. So I got a cleaning rod and bumped the bullet back out. Ran it through the sizing die again, then reseated the bullet over about ten minutes moving it a few 1/1000th at a time and got it right at 3.0600" overall. Did a second one and got it at 3.0595 (my fancy Mitoyo goes to 1/10,000th's....who knows how truly accurate it is but it's seemed good throughout the years....) Dropping both into the magazine, they feed better but still not as smooth as most of my other rifles. I still had to push a little bit, though not nearly like before. And, I still had to cam the bolt closed with some force, though now the bullets didn't stick in the throat. So all this being said, I'm not sure what's going on. The 10/1000's of overall length depending on where the bullet is seated does indeed made a difference with these Hawk 160's. I don't know if a 154 would feed a little better? But for the bolt being hard to close, the only thing I can figure is the chamber might be on the snug side. His sized cases and the ones I just resized with a brand new full length resizing die seemed to be equally snug. Maybe I need my gunsmith to get a reamer and clean the chamber up a little? I set the sizing die up so that there's a slight bit of click where the top of the ram bottoms out on the bottom of the die. I can't get it any tighter. There's no gap between the ram and die. It could be the dies, but it seems like his dies and my new ones size them about the same... In the meantime, I'll try some different bullets to see if they feed into it better. The gun is usable as-is. But it's not feeding as smoothly as I'd heard they do even with full length resizing and the darn near perfect overall length. I'm open to all suggestions here. Keep you guys posted.
 
Well, the plot thickens. I'm not 100% sure what's going on yet, but I almost suspect this rifle has a tight chamber. I have cases that Tom gave me (the owner I bought it from) that he had resized and I mic'd them. They seemed pretty much right on the money with the exception that the overall case length was about 9-10/1000th's short. But I dropped one into the chamber and I had to cam the bolt down noticeably hard. It didn't just close. I tried another and it was the same way. As well, the already loaded ones he gave me were the same way. So I set up my new RCBS resizing die, and ran a couple of the empty Norma cases he gave me through them. Full length resized them. Put them under the digital calipers and to the best I could measure, the dimensions were pretty well right on the money to Brian's drawing above except, it looks like he'd trimmed them just a hair short. But I wouldn't think 9-10/1000's off the case mouth ahead of the shoulder would matter that much. I still had to cam them down to get the bolt shut. I then loaded a 160gr Hawk round nose bullet into the case. First attempt I had trouble getting the seating die set up properly....and got it about 10/1000's too short. It would feed, but I still had to push a bit. Took the bullet puller and pulled it out and reseated it to 10/1000's long and tried it. It fed well, but then got stuck in the chamber. It stuck when I tried to pull the bolt out. I muscled the bolt back and it pulled the bullet out and left it in the chamber. So I got a cleaning rod and bumped the bullet back out. Ran it through the sizing die again, then reseated the bullet over about ten minutes moving it a few 1/1000th at a time and got it right at 3.0600" overall. Did a second one and got it at 3.0595 (my fancy Mitoyo goes to 1/10,000th's....who knows how truly accurate it is but it's seemed good throughout the years....) Dropping both into the magazine, they feed better but still not as smooth as most of my other rifles. I still had to push a little bit, though not nearly like before. And, I still had to cam the bolt closed with some force, though now the bullets didn't stick in the throat. So all this being said, I'm not sure what's going on. The 10/1000's of overall length depending on where the bullet is seated does indeed made a difference with these Hawk 160's. I don't know if a 154 would feed a little better? But for the bolt being hard to close, the only thing I can figure is the chamber might be on the snug side. His sized cases and the ones I just resized with a brand new full length resizing die seemed to be equally snug. Maybe I need my gunsmith to get a reamer and clean the chamber up a little? I set the sizing die up so that there's a slight bit of click where the top of the ram bottoms out on the bottom of the die. I can't get it any tighter. There's no gap between the ram and die. It could be the dies, but it seems like his dies and my new ones size them about the same... In the meantime, I'll try some different bullets to see if they feed into it better. The gun is usable as-is. But it's not feeding as smoothly as I'd heard they do even with full length resizing and the darn near perfect overall length. I'm open to all suggestions here. Keep you guys posted.
Maybe trim the case length? Not OAL
 
I'm not an expert by any means, but I'm wondering if it's not a headspace problem? You might need to find a go/no go gauge.
 
Today I got out my case trimmer and grabbed a case out of one of the boxes of Norma brass that look older than me. Before doing anything, I mic'd the case. It was actually slightly longer than the loaded ones I had but still under the OAL length on the drawing. But, not by much. Before trimming it, I ran it through the sizing die. Then slid it by hand into the chamber and closed the bolt. Went right shut. No camming required. Pulled it out and grabbed one from the other box. It mic'd shorter than the one that had just gone right in. This one I had to cam down. Comparing the two, they look to be identical. I'd suspected maybe the shoulder position was a little different. But as close as I could tell with them side by side in front of a light, they sure looked the same. I may have to take the whole load up to my 'smith and see what he says. It's got me dumbfounded. Only thing I can figure is the shoulder may be slightly different...but that doesn't make sense because I've run several through my full length die and some require a little camming and some don't. I guess some of them could have the shoulder 1/1000 or so short and I'm not able to measure it properly... None of this makes the rifle unusable. And for the first time in a week it's not raining out, so I might actually fire it and see what difference fire-forming makes. I'll report back :)
 
Without being at the bench with you Jim, makes it difficult to provide useful input, but based on your statements my thoughts are that you are dealing with the fire forming effects on reloaded cases.

Not only the shoulder would have moved forward slightly, but the case girth would have increased slightly.

It does take much in term of case girth expansion, even if the shoulder is in the right place, to prevent a bolt from closing, and visual comparison will likely not reveal a difference.

You most probably know that already, but just in case, there is some elasticity in the case material, therefore when running the cases in the full length die, the cases need to slightly over-resize at the bottom of the press stroke in order for the cases to expand back to desired re-size when off the die. A tight contact between die and shell holder at the bottom of the press stroke is critical to that.

Just trying to share what came to mind :)
 
Until discussion came up about the 6.5X54, I never ever even heard of a feeding problem with the other calibers in a MS. Sure enough, the6.5 is finicky about long round noses vs shorter pointed bullets. I have the problem of "bump it hard and it will feed" using Privi ammunition. But my 30'06 and 7X57? Smooth as silk with everything.


Both .30-'06 (U.S. Cartridge of 1906) and 7X57 Mannlicher Schoenauer are built on an action longer than that of M1900, M1903, M1905, M1908, M1910.

The longer action came with an improved Schoenauer magazine which has a ring added to maintain alignment of cartridges. Previous models had no such 'ring'.


MS Magazines Kuduae M1910 M1924.jpg


M1910 (9.5X57) on left, M1924 (.30-'06) on right.
 
How long is the barrel on this one? 17.7" has become the legend, but 20" and 22" barrels where also available with a stutzen stock.


In your experience is a 1920's-made 1903 with a 20" barrel worth more or less $ on the current market than one with a 17.7" barrel?

Also, do you believe that this is an original recoil plate? The one I am used to is steel...

View attachment 750595

The MS Stutzen (full stocked carbine) could be ordered in various lengths, I'd say relative value would be determined by purchaser preference as long as barrel is original and unaltered.

MS 1939 Stoeger Catalog Page 50 .jpg


Stoeger Catalog, 1939; notice 6.5 Carbine at 18", 8X56, 9X56, 9.5X57 are 20" as are 7X57 and .30-'06. Notice also the 'special order' items.

Buttplate on pre WW2 MS should be the steel trap door with storage for disassembled cleaning rod and two cartridges. It would not surprise me, however, if Steyr had offered horn butt plates as they had grip caps.

MS Buttplate.jpg


ST39 400dpi 51 Mannlicher Schoenauer 2 001 (2).jpg
 
There are services out there that can refurbish older German optics! You may be functional as is, but just think of how great it would be to have one cleaned, lubed, repaired, filled with nitrogen and re-sealed. I have one old scope which has been redone, but it was sold to me in that condition, and I believe the workman is now deceased. But there are still others available.


I am wishing I'd had my Gerard B rebuilt when I had the name of a shop that did them - or not. I watched their backlog of orders grow to a bit of over a decade, then saw 'scopes turning up on Ebay with the shop as seller after the Gent had died.

The Gerard has since developed rattles as the seals have dried.

Does anyone have a reliable source for top notch vintage scope repair, preferably in the U.S.?
 
I’ve had these issues before but usually fire forming the brass and the neck sizing helps. I have 4 9.5x56 1910 models and all are different!
The MCA publications usually claim that the 9mm cartridges show the most variation....wow
 
I am wishing I'd had my Gerard B rebuilt when I had the name of a shop that did them - or not. I watched their backlog of orders grow to a bit of over a decade, then saw 'scopes turning up on Ebay with the shop as seller after the Gent had died.

The Gerard has since developed rattles as the seals have dried.

Does anyone have a reliable source for top notch vintage scope repair, preferably in the U.S.?
Folks used to recommend Suddarth Optical, don't know if that are still going. They were VERY reasonable, too.
 
I gotta admit, I like them all with one exception, the 1956 model. I just can't warm up to that huge canoe paddle cheek piece.

The 'Canoe Paddle' went by many names, at least per Stoeger.

It was assigned several Model Year designations, also referred to as Monte Carlo or 'MC'. There was also the Monte Carlo Amerikanische (MCA) which was assigned different Model years over time.

At the same time as MC and MCA were offered, however, one could order Model 1952 GK with 'traditional European style stock'.

From 1962 Stoeger:

MS Model MC 1962 Stoeger (1).jpg

MS Model MCA 1962 Stoeger (1).jpg

MS 1952 GK 01.jpg
 

Attachments

  • MS 1952 GK 01.jpg
    MS 1952 GK 01.jpg
    71.7 KB · Views: 22
Well, I could warm up to it for a 198 bucks....7x57 if you please.:ROFLMAO:
 
Thats one of the most famous and classic firearms of its day .I just bought a full stock double Trigger mannlicher like that made in 1957 in 243 .They are like swiss watches very well made hope you enjoy it .You will probally have to reload for it .
 

Forum statistics

Threads
67,363
Messages
1,494,219
Members
145,365
Latest member
NellyKruge
 

 

 

Latest profile posts

cwpayton wrote on Halligan1975's profile.
what kind of velocity does the 140 grains list, curious how they would fit in with my current 130 gr, supply of 270s. maybe a pic of the box data listing vel. and drop. Oh and complements on that ammo belt, nice.
 
Top