Well, the board is either fixed, or it's going to run terribly. Cross your fingers and hope for the best. I'm at my technical limit right now.

FR8 QUESTION

Post Reply
Message
Author
OLDGUNNER
Bullet Banger
Bullet Banger
Posts: 531
Joined: Mon Oct 23, 2017 11:27 pm
Age: 84
Location: USA, Colorado
United States of America

FR8 QUESTION

#1 Post by OLDGUNNER » Thu Apr 05, 2018 12:16 pm

I am just wondering - I have this FR8, dated 1953 and it doesn’t look to me that it has been shot very much. I have shot it only maybe a couple of dozen times. I have never seen another to compare it with so can any FR8 owner tell me what they may think of it’s general use by these photos?
I have looked it over and to me it is a well designed battle rifle and I can’t think of one thing that I would change.
Another thing, I read where someone here has stated that ‘ALL’ military rifles have a groove diameter larger than its bullet diameter. I think that I have slugged this bore well enough to see a 0.308 groove diameter so I don’t see where this info can be correct.
The attachment DSC_0021.JPG is no longer available
DSC_0021.JPG
NRA LIFE MEMBER

User avatar
Smokey
Member
Member
Posts: 163
Joined: Tue Jun 06, 2017 6:46 pm
Age: 65
Location: democrat hell of Connecticut, USA
United States of America

Re: FR8 QUESTION

#2 Post by Smokey » Fri Apr 06, 2018 8:21 am

When someone makes a blanket statement on military rifles, they're likely to be wrong.
When smokeless powder was first being used, barrels often had larger groove diameters than the intended bullet diameter, but not all. This was due to the crud left behind from the days of black powder. Generally rifles were made with the groove diameter matching the bullet diameter by WWI. Again, not all did that. Most were at least close.
Typically, flat-based bullets would upset slightly from the pressure, so some of the extra groove diameter would be filled anyway. Russian M91 bores often had a groove diameter running 0.310 to 0.314. Of note is the land diameter. Those were often 0.010 or more smaller than the groove diameter. The bullet would be securely engraved and spun by the rifling, while the base (again) would expand some to fill the grooves.
US rifles nearly all had a 0.308 groove diameter. The British #1 Mk3 rifles I've examined (a small sample) had a 0.311 groove diameter.

A real oddball was the Austro-Hungarian M95. One rifle I worked with had a land diameter of 0.315, which is normal for an 8mm bullet. The groove diameter however was 0.334. The ammo used in WWI used a long, heavy, cylindrical round-nosed 0.323 bullet with a slight hollow in the base. Obviously this was intended to expand like a Minie bullet to fill the bore. The neck and throat area was extremely generous as well. I worked up handloads for the owner that use 0.338 cast bullets, that had the exposed nose area lightly greased. They shot pretty well.
Arguing with someone who denounces reason is like administering medicine to a corpse.

VMASCIOP2000
Member
Member
Posts: 119
Joined: Fri Jun 09, 2017 12:41 am
Age: 63
Location: oakdale minnesota
United States of America

Re: FR8 QUESTION

#3 Post by VMASCIOP2000 » Fri Apr 06, 2018 4:19 pm

Great answer Smokey. Especially in regards to blanket statements about military rifle consistency. OLDGUNNER, the FR8 rifles started life as Spanish Military M 43s . They were very close to K98s in length and appearance. To make the conversion the 8MM Mauser barrels were removed and replaced with shorter, BRAND NEW NATO 7.62 ( some may argue "CETME" ) BARRELS ,and of course, headspaced. The conversions were then used (to some extent) for training. Very normal for the bores to still be Quite nice. Very decent accuracy, if you can get the sights to line up. Generally the (bent) K 98 bolts work well and you can use one to avoid crushing your knuckles on the rear sight while cycling the bolt. Very handy and fun. The condition of yours in regards to the one photo shot seem above, to way above, average. Pretty common to find that the bolt and receivers have matching numbers. Nice find.
I was R.L.E.V.M. on our old forum.

OLDGUNNER
Bullet Banger
Bullet Banger
Posts: 531
Joined: Mon Oct 23, 2017 11:27 pm
Age: 84
Location: USA, Colorado
United States of America

Re: FR8 QUESTION

#4 Post by OLDGUNNER » Fri Apr 06, 2018 10:29 pm

Smokey - Yes, Yes, of course what you say is very true, just as you state, and I understand, but...but...everyone does not have the same experience and ‘Fetchens’. As I have said, “When one uses ‘always or never’ in a serious sentence, they will usually be wrong.” An old buddy of mine had this saying, “He ain’t had no fetchens.” And I was referring to the post, “...nor did he know that all militaries used
bore riding” [ smaller than groove ] bullets.” ...as you may have read. I am trying to repeat it as written by the author.

And VMA – Personally, I do appreciate the straight-out bolt handles on these ‘Military Rifles’. These are to me maybe 3/8 or a half an inch longer than really necessary...’for some’. And yes, the bent bolt handles look nicer and have a more esthetic overall appearance. And to this I would like to think that the designer had this in mind...but he may have also had in mind in the heat of battle, in the winter time, during a snow storm, at 50 below, with the soldier wearing mittens, this straight bolt handle would be better to manipulate. I can speak of this personally, as I was at one time, in the Air Force working on Baffin Island outside at 50 below, walking at 45 degrees into the wind, wearing WW2 ‘Trigger Fingered’ gloves while working on Radar and Radio Equipment. And I think that Remington did the right thing by putting bent bolt handles on their 700’s.

And yes, the s/n of the bolt matches the rifle. I just think that this rifle may have been carried a lot but shot very little. But it is the only one that I have ever seen. And I don’t happen to know just what you may be talking about with the bad sights. Are you referring to the big rear ‘Buckhorn’ sight’? For me, I could go through a whole war with just that sight. I think it is nice to better see what one may be shooting at – just my thought. I was in during the Korean ‘conflict’ and was sure glad that I wasn’t up there on the front lines. It seemed like too many of my school friends didn’t have such good luck.

An M1 story, one time during a ‘FAM’ shooting, someone, maybe me, suggested we give an M1 a durability test. I was the only one that volunteered....so I would shoot an M1 until it broke. I would shoot prone and we had loose ammo...four others would reload clips and I would shoot as fast as I could until the rifle would quit. I shot for like 30 minutes. Soon the forearm was so hot that I had two Fatigue caps under it. After something over a thousand rounds it was just too darn hot to reload and I had to quit, and that rifle never missed a lick.

Another thing on these Mausers - it seems that a lot have to say that they are noted for their smoothness to operate. I don’t notice any of this ‘smoothness’ that they speak of. Could it be that just because they see it so written, they feel that they have to agree?
NRA LIFE MEMBER

User avatar
Smokey
Member
Member
Posts: 163
Joined: Tue Jun 06, 2017 6:46 pm
Age: 65
Location: democrat hell of Connecticut, USA
United States of America

Re: M1 Garand Endurance.

#5 Post by Smokey » Sat Apr 07, 2018 7:05 am

Sorry if I'm participating in a topic going off-subject.
The story on the Garand really says a lot about the design of the rifle.
In the enemy-occupied "place" I'm in now, that's the best thing we're allowed to own at the moment (till the enemy bans them as well).
The area I live has quite an assortment of big mean furry things that will stomp, chomp, claw and gore you.
A Garand with 180gr softpoints loaded to 2550fps is quite capable of dealing with anything having hostile intentions.
(A handload I worked up using Quickload and IMR4320 specifically for the M1.)
The load is also extremely accurate in the rifle.

On the subject of smoothness, some good quality grease applied to the bolt and firing pin cocking surfaces makes a huge difference.
If the rifle hasn't had a lot of operation, there may be a little roughness to smooth over.
Arguing with someone who denounces reason is like administering medicine to a corpse.

VMASCIOP2000
Member
Member
Posts: 119
Joined: Fri Jun 09, 2017 12:41 am
Age: 63
Location: oakdale minnesota
United States of America

Re: FR8 QUESTION

#6 Post by VMASCIOP2000 » Sun Apr 08, 2018 5:13 pm

OLDGUNNER wrote:
Fri Apr 06, 2018 10:29 pm
Smokey - Yes, Yes, of course what you say is very true, just as you state, and I understand, but...but...everyone does not have the same experience and ‘Fetchens’. As I have said, “When one uses ‘always or never’ in a serious sentence, they will usually be wrong.” An old buddy of mine had this saying, “He ain’t had no fetchens.” And I was referring to the post, “...nor did he know that all militaries used
bore riding” [ smaller than groove ] bullets.” ...as you may have read. I am trying to repeat it as written by the author.

And VMA – Personally, I do appreciate the straight-out bolt handles on these ‘Military Rifles’. These are to me maybe 3/8 or a half an inch longer than really necessary...’for some’. And yes, the bent bolt handles look nicer and have a more esthetic overall appearance. And to this I would like to think that the designer had this in mind...but he may have also had in mind in the heat of battle, in the winter time, during a snow storm, at 50 below, with the soldier wearing mittens, this straight bolt handle would be better to manipulate. I can speak of this personally, as I was at one time, in the Air Force working on Baffin Island outside at 50 below, walking at 45 degrees into the wind, wearing WW2 ‘Trigger Fingered’ gloves while working on Radar and Radio Equipment. And I think that Remington did the right thing by putting bent bolt handles on their 700’s.

And yes, the s/n of the bolt matches the rifle. I just think that this rifle may have been carried a lot but shot very little. But it is the only one that I have ever seen. And I don’t happen to know just what you may be talking about with the bad sights. Are you referring to the big rear ‘Buckhorn’ sight’? For me, I could go through a whole war with just that sight. I think it is nice to better see what one may be shooting at – just my thought. I was in during the Korean ‘conflict’ and was sure glad that I wasn’t up there on the front lines. It seemed like too many of my school friends didn’t have such good luck.

An M1 story, one time during a ‘FAM’ shooting, someone, maybe me, suggested we give an M1 a durability test. I was the only one that volunteered....so I would shoot an M1 until it broke. I would shoot prone and we had loose ammo...four others would reload clips and I would shoot as fast as I could until the rifle would quit. I shot for like 30 minutes. Soon the forearm was so hot that I had two Fatigue caps under it. After something over a thousand rounds it was just too darn hot to reload and I had to quit, and that rifle never missed a lick.

Another thing on these Mausers - it seems that a lot have to say that they are noted for their smoothness to operate. I don’t notice any of this ‘smoothness’ that they speak of. Could it be that just because they see it so written, they feel that they have to agree?
I too like the buckhorn sight, and the peep as well. To be more clear , the adjustment of the front sight has been troublesome for me. The retaining (set ) screw, that is to be loosened before the sight itself can be moved, is always "frozen".
I was R.L.E.V.M. on our old forum.

OLDGUNNER
Bullet Banger
Bullet Banger
Posts: 531
Joined: Mon Oct 23, 2017 11:27 pm
Age: 84
Location: USA, Colorado
United States of America

Re: FR8 QUESTION

#7 Post by OLDGUNNER » Mon Apr 09, 2018 12:23 pm

VMA – Okay, as I had said I had only shot this FR8 a couple dozen times and I did just look at the front sight, and had just never loosened that set screw – looks like a good feature to me...and again I can appreciate everything that the designer has done with this rifle. I don’t think that I have noticed something like this on a rifle before.
Here is why I think it is a good idea. These rifles will come out of ‘some’ factory – every rifle is going to be a ‘little’ different. They are designed to shoot a given ammo, the 7.62 Nato. Most of this 7.62 ammo is going to be made at different factories and made a little different but within certain standards of course.
These rifles are issued to military troops along with ‘SOME’ ammo...their commanders should want his troops to be able to hit an enemy soldier when and if the time comes...so he tells his trusted armorer to adjust that front sight up or down on each rifle for say a zero at 200 meters the best that he can, with the ammo that they have, with a certain ‘sight picture’. And these troops are told by their sergeant to use this sight picture and.... GO PRACTICE....And be ready to shoot that enemy soldier before he shoots you. That’s the way that I would look at things if I were the commander.

I have my own theory on the regular typical rear sight adjustment. And the rear sight of these 7.35 Carcanos for example with the nonadjustable sight fits this perfectly. This is not a target rifle as most hunting rifles ‘are not’ either. When a soldier is in battle he can’t see an enemy and estimate the distance and adjust his rear sight for this before he shoots...no, he has to up and shoot, and based on his previous practice he will decide how much to elevate his shot. The same thing applies to a hunting rifle...the typical adjustable rear sight on a hunting rifle is not designed to be adjusted for that deer shot that one may ‘estimate’ to be at 300 yards. I say, leave that rear sight on the lowest setting and glue it in place for hunting. When one starts playing with that rear sight, they won’t really know where they will be shooting. Now of course when shooting at a range and playing around, sure one can adjust it.
When I was 5 years old just before my 6th birthday, my dad and I went to the local Sears Store and he bought me a .22 single shot for 3.95 and some .22 shorts. And the first thing that he told me was to just leave that rear sight where it was and don’t fiddle with it. This is where I learned what I say about this rear sight stuff. He tried to buy me a box of shorts, at 10 cents a box, for me to shoot every day for the next year and a half or so. I gave that .22 to my son and he continued to wear off the firing pin – I made a new one for it. A few years ago he told me that he owned 115 handguns and 15 shotguns. He had started a security business and for some kind of liability reasons, he had to own the guns. He had 275 guards at that time. He had a few wild stories...one was where his guard was at a big payroll transfer and the guard robbed them at gun point and both were never heard of since, accept for this part, the guard sent the gun back to him in the mail.
As for that front sight post, what's wrong with a little dab of grease?
NRA LIFE MEMBER

ffuries
Member
Member
Posts: 390
Joined: Fri Jun 02, 2017 8:51 pm
Age: 50
Location: Panama City, Florida
United States of America

Re: FR8 QUESTION

#8 Post by ffuries » Mon Apr 09, 2018 3:21 pm

Regardless of make (Mosin Nagant, Mauser, Arisaka, Enfield etc), I take my bolts completely apart, clean thoroughly, oiled with transmission fluid, reassemble, wiped down leaving a thin layer of ATF on them. All my bolts glide like silk, no sticking, no hanging up, no gritty feeling.
Mike
TSgt, USAF Retired
Jan 86 - Sept 08
Aircrew Life Support
"Your Life Is Our Business"
(122X0, 1T1X1, 1P0X1)
NRA Life Member

OLDGUNNER
Bullet Banger
Bullet Banger
Posts: 531
Joined: Mon Oct 23, 2017 11:27 pm
Age: 84
Location: USA, Colorado
United States of America

Re: FR8 QUESTION

#9 Post by OLDGUNNER » Mon Apr 09, 2018 8:16 pm

Well heck - you are right...I bought that 20 years ago and never have taken it apart nor oiled it. And...and...it may have very well been setting around since 1953 without a lick of care. Strange how we can overlook simple things like that, or at least I do. Thanks for the kick in the butt.
NRA LIFE MEMBER

Post Reply

Return to “Fun Facts and Trivia”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests