Spanish Mauser FR8

Scott · Post by **Scott** » Wed Jan 15, 2003 12:09 am

I thought I spice up the board a little.Whats the real deal with that rifle,and ammo.I have one,and would like to know if 308 winchester is ok to shoot in it?I have shot it with 762x52 LC nato,and the brass looks perfect.I have heard the winchester is thinner brass than the nato 762.I really like shooting the little bolt action assault weapon.Seems like there are lots of mauser experts here.

Al_Messer · Post by **Al_Messer** » Wed Jan 15, 2003 8:42 am

I don't know about the thickness of the Winchester brass, but Lake City Arsenal turned out some of the best brass the Army has ever had. Lots of fellows seek it out for loading match ammo.

Scott · Post by **Scott** » Wed Jan 15, 2003 9:33 am

Al,I will have to remember to pick up my brass.My friend gave me three 480 rounds boxs of the stuff.Her dad was a sniper in vietnam.He also did long range target shooting.He no longer here,but I told here to look for his rifle.I have a feeling its as nice as the ammo.

BarryBriscoe · Post by **BarryBriscoe** » Wed Jan 15, 2003 1:22 pm

Scott,
All of the .308 military brass should be thicker.You can sort it out by weighing it before reloading.

I believe Remington commercial brass is the thickest in the commercial variety.

The thicker brass reduces your case capacity and is a limiting factor when reloading with certain types of gunpowder at maximum loads in modern bolt guns.

The FR8 .308 conversion should be treated with care as it was never intended to be shot with hot loads and a lot of people have questioned the strength of that action firing the .308 round to begin with.

GeorgeGaskill · Post by **GeorgeGaskill** » Wed Jan 15, 2003 3:31 pm

I've heard the FR8 was made as a training rifle for use prior to issue of a self loader. Its safety using .308 Win ammo is probably dependent on the individual rifle; some will be OK, others will be a risk. You could probably load some minimum charge (from a reloading manual) loads for it for safer ammo than commercial or surplus military ammo. Would be interesting to know what the opinion of the Spaniards is regarding use of full charge 7.62 NATO ammo in them.

Al_Messer · Post by **Al_Messer** » Wed Jan 15, 2003 6:29 pm

What was it's original caliber? The .308/7.62 NATO is loaded to around 52,200 c.u.p., which is pretty hot.

GeneT · Post by **GeneT** » Wed Jan 15, 2003 6:53 pm

The SAAMI specs for .308 and NATO specs for 7.62 are not the same. They're very close, but the 7.62 allows for longer headspace than the .308. In the middle of the spec, the two overlap (That is, one cartridge can meet both specs, but some cartridges will meet only one.) Before equating the two, know your headspace and the appropriate spec.
GsT

Scott · Post by **Scott** » Wed Jan 15, 2003 7:39 pm

Gene,does that mean there is two different gauges for measuring?Other words one for .308,and another for 762x52 nato using the same type gauge.
Scott

GeneT · Post by **GeneT** » Wed Jan 15, 2003 8:42 pm

Scott,

While I have seen some manufacturers/retailers sell the same gages for .308 & 7.62, there should be two. (I don't have a supplier to list, sorry.)

Here's some dims found in a brief 'net search:

"For the .308 Winchester: GO gage (or minimum headspace) is 1.630". Most of us set/cut the minimum headspace at 1.631" to 1.632" to give room for carbon build-up. NO GO gage (or the maximum for initial barreling/cutting of headspace) is 1.634". The NO GO spec. is for ACCURACY, not for safety. Field Reject gage (or the maximum headspace) is 1.638".

For the 7.62mm: GO gage is 1.634" (the same as NO GO for the .308 Win.). NO GO is 1.638" (the same as the Field Reject for the .308 Win.). You will probably never find either spec. in military manuals, as they only list the Field Reject. The Field Reject is 1.6445".

Another good place to look is here:
Armalite headspace

Scott · Post by **Scott** » Wed Jan 15, 2003 9:03 pm

Thanks Gene,and everybody else for the info.I use to have some of the good websites for info,but a worm got to my computer.I guess it's time for some more homework.

Al_Messer · Post by **Al_Messer** » Wed Jan 15, 2003 11:20 pm

Gee! I guess that somebody forgot to tell the N.R.A. and Winchester then!

GeneT · Post by **GeneT** » Thu Jan 16, 2003 1:54 pm

I'm not sure what you're referring to Al, but Winchester is the reason there's a difference. They proposed the cartridge (.308) to the military when they were looking for a replacement for the .30-06. At about the same time they rushed the .308 into commercial production. (Gotta make that tooling pay.) For whatever reason the military made the changes they deemed necessary resulting in the 7.62x52. (I believe these changes were made to assist in reliable operation of machine guns at the time.) An interesting sidenote, the cartridge that the .308 beat out was the .300 Savage. Does the NRA somewhere refer to them as the same cartridge?
GsT

The Home Machinist!

Spanish Mauser FR8

Spanish Mauser FR8

Re: Spanish Mauser FR8

Re: Spanish Mauser FR8

Re: Spanish Mauser FR8

Re: Spanish Mauser FR8

Re: Spanish Mauser FR8

.308 and 7.62 NATO not the same!

Re: .308 and 7.62 NATO not the same!

Re: .308 and 7.62 NATO not the same!

Re: .308 and 7.62 NATO not the same!

Re: .308 and 7.62 NATO not the same!

Re: .308 and 7.62 NATO not the same!