[Rmcclure]

Gday all, I've found a Turkish Mauser in a nearby store, beautiful condition, smooth action, all correct parts
I'm new to historical rifles and hoping to pick your brains. Is the 1893 Mauser (marked 1935 Ankara) a reliable shooter and viable as a hunting rifle?
It's chambered in 8x57 (from memory) so would anyone know how scarce this round is to find?

Thank you all!

 

[JWSmith1959]

Most of the 1893 were 7 X 57, but a bore slug and chamber cast should be able to tell you that. I believe that is a 1935 Turkish Mauser though, which likely is 8 X 57.

Ammo is scarce no matter the caliber these days, but the 7mm round should be available and the 8 X 57 is still manufactured.

Might try an ammoseek search.

Nice find and should make a fine rifle for just about anything in NA.

Good luck and all the best.

 

[roverboy]

Looks like you found a nice one. A lot of the Turkish 93's and Model 38's are a little on the rough side. Before everything went crazy, 8x57 or 8mm is what most call it was fairly easy to find. Good caliber. I've killed a few deer with it.

 

[MikeG]

That's a pretty nice one. The turks did all sorts of interesting things with rifles they got from other countries, and some of them are pretty ugly. I think you did well. Would like to see a pic of the entire left side of the action.

 

[leverite]

Just realize that the 93 can not handle accidental pressure from pierced primers or ruptured cases like a 98.
And some 8mm loads meant for a 98 may be too hot for a 93.
I may be wrong, but it's likely that most cartridges used back in the 93's day were loaded with lead bullets. Although I have used jacketed bullets in my own 93...handloaded down.
I wouldn't use mil surp ammo in it.

 

[Rmcclure]

Just realize that the 93 can not handle accidental pressure from pierced primers or ruptured cases like a 98.
And some 8mm loads meant for a 98 may be too hot for a 93.
I may be wrong, but it's likely that most cartridges used back in the 93's day were loaded with lead bullets. Although I have used jacketed bullets in my own 93...handloaded down.
I wouldn't use mil surp ammo in it.

If this is the case how will it handle the factory made 8mm that comes out these days?
Will be some time before I can handload

 

[MikeG]

The main locking lugs are about the same, the barrel shank a little smaller, but strength isn't the issue with the 93 till things go wrong.

No third locking lug and no "deflector" on the bolt shroud to handle escaping gas are the main problems with the 93. There are probably some other small differences in handling pierced primers, etc. Would have to compare bolts side by side.

U.S. made 8mm is pretty weak; no idea on what is available in Oz. At a minimum, I'd want some safety glasses.

 

[tdoyka]

use US commercial ammo or if you are a reloader go to hornady, speer and sierra manuals. just be careful when you go to their top loads, start slow.

i have 2 or 3 m93 in 7x57 and they shoot commercial ammo just fine. i have a 8x58 but its in the m98.

 

[roverboy]

The factory ammo like, Remington, Winchester etc. is usually loaded with a 170 gr. soft point at about 2360 fps. It's mild but, still a good hunting load, and safe in weaker actions. I've fired the ones I mentioned and some Igman. It was loaded mild too.

 

[leverite]

Another thought/question. Could the change in 8mm/7.92 bullet diameter in the 20th century be another issue to using modern 8mm ammo in a 93? Was it 0.318 to 0.323?
Dang if I can remember, but I believe bullet diameter was increased prior to ww1.
If mine, I would slug the bore to see what it really is. Also helpful when buying bullets for handloading.

 

[Gil Martin]

Welcome to the Forum. Glad to see you here and hope that your post often. That is a nice looking military rifle and you did very well. More pictures would be helpful. All the best...
Gil

 

[roverboy]

Another thought/question. Could the change in 8mm/7.92 bullet diameter in the 20th century be another issue to using modern 8mm ammo in a 93? Was it 0.318 to 0.323?
Dang if I can remember, but I believe bullet diameter was increased prior to ww1.
If mine, I would slug the bore to see what it really is. Also helpful when buying bullets for handloading.

Yeah, they were supposed to go from .318 to .323".

 

[3L120]

The Turks had 3 Mausers in service. The 93 and 03 were originally chambered for the7.65x53 or Argentine Mauser cartridge. They were later, in the 30s, rebar relied for the 7.92x57 round, which is why the receiver ring has a bite out of it, to fit the longer round. To the best of my knowledge, the new barrels were all .323 diameter.

they were supposed to be able to handle the Turkish ammo, which is loaded hot. The operant word is ...supposed to...If you can get American ammo, use it. Otherwise see if you can find some ammo not listed as “hot”. Just stay away from the Turkish military stuff.

 

[Eielson1978]

The main locking lugs are about the same, the barrel shank a little smaller, but strength isn't the issue with the 93 till things go wrong.

No third locking lug and no "deflector" on the bolt shroud to handle escaping gas are the main problems with the 93. There are probably some other small differences in handling pierced primers, etc. Would have to compare bolts side by side.

U.S. made 8mm is pretty weak; no idea on what is available in Oz. At a minimum, I'd want some safety glasses.

Recently I saw a post / Article about shooting the MG-42. One thing that was mentioned was to Not Use Yugo Surplus ammo. Some is very old and there is an issue with over pressure. So, I'd suggest some research and avoid the surplus ammo until you have done some homework.

 

[Don Fischer]

If I was going to get something like a mod 93 for hunting, I'd take up reloading. Well I do reload! I have different data in a couple manuals for old military rifles in 6.5x55 and modern rifles in the same cartridge. Never look at the 8mm stuff but I strongly suspect that if there is not data for both the the data is for old rifles. But I'd give the manual company a call and find out for sure. Come to think of it, most data has the rifle they developed the data in written in the manual.

 

[Sawfish]

If I was going to get something like a mod 93 for hunting, I'd take up reloading. Well I do reload! I have different data in a couple manuals for old military rifles in 6.5x55 and modern rifles in the same cartridge. Never look at the 8mm stuff but I strongly suspect that if there is not data for both the the data is for old rifles. But I'd give the manual company a call and find out for sure. Come to think of it, most data has the rifle they developed the data in written in the manual.

Spend the extra bucks and go for a 98 or at least a 95. Much stronger and safer guns.

 

[Winston30]

The old P-88 ammo with the .3188 dia bullet has nothing to do with the Turk 8mm modification of the 1893 Mauser. Lead bullets were never used in any 8x57mm service ammo . A 95 action is not any stronger than a 93 action . The Germans fought WWI with a lot of the 8mm S ammo used in the Gew-88 with no problems . The Turks used a lot of 8mm S ammo in their 93 Mausers . US made 8mm ammo will be just fine for Deer hunting . The Germans used 3 different dia 8mm bullets in service , P- 1888 - .3188 , 1896 1/2 S - .321 , 1908 sS .323 . P-88 and S was for use in any Service rifle , the sS was first for machine guns then standard for all untill 1942 .

 

[tdoyka]

Spend the extra bucks and go for a 98 or at least a 95. Much stronger and safer guns.

heck, i use a 91 argie mauser(3 of them) and i'm "supposed" to go to a 98? poppycock!!!!!!

 

[ribbonstone2]

One guy’s view on hunting with mil-spec type rifles.





Can have fun getting use to them, and their iron sights, and reasonably hit a foot sized circle with open iron (and enough practice) at freakishly long range...when the light is right, you’ve guess the range right.

Really don’t care (by the philosophy of the time) where you hit them….enemy killed of just AFU’ed, they aren't interested in effectively shooting back at you.


Not good enough for hunting. We want dead-right-now. Could be cartridge limitations, could be eye sight limitations, most often it’s iron sight limitations that decide how far that’s going to be.


Given iron sights, the “coke can” limit for 5 out of 5 seems to be pretty close no matter what the rifle….you run out of eyes before you run out of ballistics.


So I’m not seriously worried about ballistics….so long as it’s enough “oomph” to do the job and enough iron sight ability stay on a coke can, doesn't seem to do any worse or better on deer.


Yeah...I know...black powder an 1000 yards...all that stuff. And it’s kind of true. But if you really watch the guy’s practice/sigher shots….maybe it’s not as hunting ready as it looks at the end.

 

[Winston30]

It would depend on the shooters skill , but so would using a scope . I have killed a lot of game with military rifles just as dead as people with scoped hunting rifles . I ran military rifle matches for about 20 years and the top scorers had no problem putting 5 shots at 100 yards under 1 inch in the X ring with as issued rifles . A lot of deer hunting is done from a a rest in a blind at under 100 yards , very doable with some practice . It would be the shooter more than the rifle . I have a friend who runs a deer processing operation , sees 100's of deer . He says over half are gut shot , butt shot or have over 3 holes in them . Done with scoped rifles .