why? Push feed. Untrustworthy safety. Exists as a military rifle solely because the pre64 Winchester ended and the US demanded something, anything, made in America. Wood has always been pedestrian. Side safety is cheap. Barrel quality was never great. They are expensive for their simplicity. Bottom metal is now junk pot metal on many of them. Their bridges are out of true .003”-.008” making two piece mounts a nightmare too.apologies to all, but i would take the rem hands down no question.
Come to shoulder with sights aligned swinging like a fine English double shotgun catching up to the buck then passing gun goes off almost of its own volition buck falls. Not to mention it’s eye catching good looks when you take the pictures. There is no finer rifle for off hand and jump shooting animals. Then there is the fact that more than likely you would be the only one in your group using one. Other than that they are both rifles. I wouldn’t trade my MS 1905 for any other rifle. But admittedly I am biased.
Comparing a rem and a mannlicher Schoenauer is like comparing McDonalds to Peter Lugers.
I’ll leave it at that, otherwise I’d have to cover it in a 14 volume desk reference series.
apologies to all, but i would take the rem hands down no question.
The only custom is the Model 7 Mannlicher.The rest are right off the rack..........................
while i respect your obvious love for these rifles they are not for me.
They are exquisite and somehow exactly right in the hand. Their original rounds are also perfectly balanced for the game for which they were intended. They work on other continents as well. The 6.5x54 is an elegant and perfectly proportioned carbine for North American whitetail. And it is definitely not a Remington Model 700 or a Winchester Model 70 - pre or post - 64.I understand and respect your opinions, but you didn't answer;
have you ever handled and fired a Mannlicher Schoenauer, especially a pre WW2 example?
One place I will directly disagree with you - there is nothing over engineered or over complicated about the MS. They are a natural progression of Ritter Ferdinand von Mannlicher's previous designs combined with the simple elegance of Otto Schoenauer's rotary magazine.
In military form (Y1903...) they served reliably through two world wars and beyond.
They are difficult to scope, having been originally engineered for iron sights. Vintage see - through claw mounts were wonderful, however. Simple one handed removal of scope, always returns to precise zero when reinstalled.
Claw mount on Mauser:
View attachment 376542
View attachment 376544
View attachment 376545
That's a lovely MS stutzen. Looks to be an early one with the 'Prince of Wales' grip.They are exquisite and somehow exactly right in the hand. Their original rounds are also perfectly balanced for the game for which they were intended...
I should also add, that we build magnificent rifles in this country as good as anything anywhere. A Todd Ramirez creation is as finely built as anything ever created in London or Suhl. I'd put my own Libhart .404 up against most anywhere.
American custom gunmakers have been building such masterpieces for a century or more, and the best take second place to none anywhere.
One aspect of the various rifles mentioned is the technology available to the makers at the time. Following is a photograph of the three basic styles available in the years following the Great war. The MS 1903 6.5x54 is 1920; the Spfd 1903 is 1919, and the M98 GEW is from 1916.
The flat ugly and awkward locking Mannlicher-Schoenauer M1903....I have owned a few Steyr rifles but not any earlier Mannlichers, I know they are fine rifles, but to my eye they are just flat ugly and awkward looking.