Mauser Model 1896 9mm

[Larryjk]

I received a Mauser 1896 9mm "Broomhandle" for repair. All of the springs were shot, and other parts missing. I replaced everything and thought I had it knocked. However, pulling the trigger will not drop the hammer. There is a little slop in the trigger to sear connection and I think that may be it. Does anyone out there repair broomhandles, or know of anyone that is good at repairing them? I am beyond my knowledge and have only had this one is my hands. I would really like information.
HELP! HELP!:(

[skeet]

Had one in for repair one time..being that there really aren't all that many pins?? etc it goes together in a different manner...If I remember correctly. Take her apart and put back together again. Got an exploded drawing?? ..Reminds me..I just had a gun in my hands last weekend that the guy didn't know how to take the bolt out of. How many of ya have ever seen a Newton rifle?? It was another gun ya hadda be careful puttin back together. Somehow or another you could put the bolt back together wrong on them

Larry I just have a recollection that the gun could go together wrong and wouldn't fire..but it has been a long time. Do it have a stock holster...big 9 in the grips?? Most I have seen were in 7.65 Mauser

[Larryjk]

It is a 9mm and the holster/stock is not present. The serial #s on the top and bottom don't match so it is definitely made up from parts. I know about the internal parts that can be put in wrong and have checked that several times. This problem seems to be in the sear assembly.

In the Newton rifle the bolt can be assembled wrong, causing it to stick out of your forehead when fired in that condition. I never had one but a fellow east of here had one but had to give it up in an estate settlement. It was the .256.

[PJgunner]

I don't think it was the Newton that would blow the bolt back if not put together right. I believe it was one of the versions of the Ross, I'm thinking the m1910 but not sure on that point. I belive the ones in .303 Brit were OK, but it was the version for the .280 Ross that had the problem.
Paul B.

[Jack]

I think PJGunner hit it- it was the first model Ross rifle that could be mis assembled.
The Ross was a straight pull bolt action, if I remember right, with a rotating bolt head. In the first model, if the assembly wasn't correct, the bolt would appear normal in closed position, and the rifle would fire, with the bolt head not rotated to lock it. Instant forehead ornament!
Ross corrected the problem with the addition of a pin somewhere in the bolt assembly. I can recall someone who collected Ross' explaining to look for the pin, but I can't remember where exactly- long time ago...
The Ross in 303 Brit was used by Canadian troops in WW1, and developed a poor reputation as a military rifle. Apparently the Ross design bolt didn't have enough camming power to extract some of the shoddily made cartridges that were used during WW1. But no problems with bolts flying out- that problem had been corrected by then.

[Larryjk]

PJ and Jack, You fellows are correct that the Ross is the one that could be assembled deadly. Mea Culpa.

[Jack]

Larry, Newton rifles did at one time have some problems.
The Newton rifle was the Cadillac of it's time, and many of them around today are really well built, attractive, and quite functional. However, Charles Newton was a good designer, a great promoter, but, as a businessman, not quite so good. And, the Depression hit rifle makers hard.
Newton was taken over in bankruptcy, when the factory was located in Buffalo, NY (hence the term 'Buffalo Newton'). The bank that took them over tried to get as much money as possible out of the company by assembling and selling rifles from parts that were in the factory at the time of takeover- good parts, rejected parts- any parts.
A number of 'Buffalo Newtons' got released to the public with bad heat treating and other problems.
I once ran into a fellow who's father had worked for Newton in Buffalo. This fellow's father had bought a Newton in 256 at an employee price when the bankruptcy happened. The rifle was really beautiful- and had bulged the chamber the first time he fired the rifle.
Apparently the barrel or receiver (or both) had never been heat treated.

[Larryjk]

Jack, A friend had a Newton in a 256 that he had to surrender during an estate settlement. He damn near cried over that because he had so many memories in the gun. It was in really good shape (had been his grandfathers) and he and his grandfather had taken all kinds of big game with the rifle. He likes my 6.5/06 because he feels it is almost the same thing. I believe the 6.5/06 is a little faster because the case has a little more capacity. I'll have to look up loading data for the 256 Newton so I can compare them. I am getting 3098 fps out of a 24 inch barrel with Hornady 129 grain interlock. They are heck on antelope. Hey, this is a handgun thread!

[Jack]

Larry, Ken Waters did a nice write up of the 256 Newton cartridge in Pet Loads, and he used an original Newton rifle to do the work up.
One thing Waters pointed out in the write up was that there is some very, very suspect loading data around for the 256 Newton. He reported that some published loads were several grains more powder than would fit in a case, even compressed.
Going from Waters work on the 256, the Newton holds less powder than a 6.5-06 (the Newton case is shorter), so clearly the Newton won't produce 6.5-06 velocities.
I've seen in print a number of times that a 256 Newton is a 270 or 30-06 necked down to 6.5- not so. The Newton case is definitely shorter. Ballistically, according to Waters, the Newton is a tad faster than a 6.5x55, but not a match for a 6.5-06.