How many hours of work to make a Mauser Receiver

[indy1919a4]

I realize that arms manufacturers will make parts in batches and then assemble them.

Also there are some examples that I read about like the Radom factory & Czech factories being taken over
with large stocks of receivers captured and then used to assemble new rifles...

So I ask.. How many man hours did it take to make a Mauser Receiver (unfinished of course) ???

And how come so many receivers were made ahead of time..??? I am assuming that the creation receiver is the real bottleneck
in a rifles production???

[Reverend Mauser]

I realize this post is from some time ago, but I'd throw in a few thoughts. I can't tell you exact time, but do know it was fairly time consuming and expensive to make a Mauser. I understand it required a lot of milling.

A later anecdote: I understand that post-WWII, Savage Arms designed its Model 110 to be made with much use of the lathe to reduce labor/production costs over guns in the Mauser tradition that needed more use of the milling machine.

Incidentally, this relates to a question that has long puzzled me: how long to make a Mauser compared a Mosin-Nagant. The Russians stayed with the basic M91 design without any serious changes till replacing bolt guns entirely. I suspect its related to manufacturing capability.

[Rapidrob]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uWvqeVckUvI

[indy1919a4]

Many thanks for posting, Those k98s look nice off the assembly line..

I do personally like the German Newsreels during WW II they are very rousing

[bobvz]

I realize that arms manufacturers will make parts in batches and then assemble them.

Also there are some examples that I read about like the Radom factory & Czech factories being taken over
with large stocks of receivers captured and then used to assemble new rifles...

So I ask.. How many man hours did it take to make a Mauser Receiver (unfinished of course) ???

And how come so many receivers were made ahead of time..??? I am assuming that the creation receiver is the real bottleneck
in a rifles production???

Not so many years ago Remington was importing and selling M98 copies (complete hunting rifles) from Yugoslavia. They were retailing between $600-$700. Likely they were made on CNC machines and then hand assembled. Back in the day they would have been milled on single purpose machine tools manned by one person one step at a time. I'm guessing there were at least 100 separate operations required to produce a receiver ready for fitting. Also guessing at 6 minutes per operation that would be 600 minutes or around 10 man hours per receiver. Labor was real cheap in those days and thousands were employed in gun making. I presume other parts such as barrels and bolts were made ahead of time but if you were in the business of making rifles of different calibers for varied clientele it only makes sense that you would make up a stock of receivers that could be fitted to any standard caliber. Probably omitting the milling for feed rails and receiver stamps. 10 man hours today would run around $750-$1,000 or more for a receiver in the USA.

[Reverend Mauser]

Labor was real cheap in those days

10 man hours today would run around $750-$1,000 or more for a receiver in the USA.

That's one of the reasons the commercial manufacturers started changing up on the guns they made post-WWII. Labor costs went up with unions emerging in the New Deal and WWII. Savage designed the model 110, Remington the model 700. It was related to why Winchester changed the Model 70 in 1964.

I remember reading not long ago some custom gun maker commenting that a model 98 would easily cost $2000 to make today.

[miniwini]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uWvqeVckUvI

Thanks man, I didn't know that there is old videos about making K-98 Mauser
I like it
Great piece of history for sure.

[revjen45]

"Not so many years ago Remington was importing and selling M98 copies (complete hunting rifles) from Yugoslavia."
This is the MK-X, which Remington called the 798.

[Coffeebean]

It just slays me that the craftsmen wore a tie to run a lathe or other jobs!

[Charles Lipscomb]

It just slays me that the craftsmen wore a tie to run a lathe or other jobs!

My dad worked as a deliveryman for a dairy, millk, juice etc. Company policy was no wedding rings or rings of any type could be worn on hands. Due to people lising fingers in equipment.. Guys generally wore them on a chain. My dad said the wives hated it.
I know not gun related.

[72 usmc]

Just think of all those old rifles as works of craftsmen and artists. No way could they build a Gew 98 , K98k , K31 or those other early wood stock works of art like a Brazilian or Peruvian mauser or that fine Swedish mauser. Heck a cheep Umarex BB gun is starting around $200-300. And look at the reissue Colts or other reissue replica WW II firearms for cost, all above $1000. And do not even get me started on new inferior furniture finish or the cost to get a car show finish on an antique car..... Cost of labor and the difficulty to actually find a craftsperson today is crazy.

Then you think about the dangerous factory conditions, low wages, long hours, and the accidents where people paid in blood to manufacture things..
Then one values a rifles original condition as a history of work. Some pictures of cloth mills . Talk about getting hung up on a piece of machinery!

I love this video of making K98Ks, great link- thanks: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uWvqeVckUvI

[Charles Lipscomb]

Belts made from buffalo / bison hides..

[indy1919a4]

It just slays me that the craftsmen wore a tie to run a lathe or other jobs!

That was not just done in Europe, Below is a link to Winchester Factory turning out BARs

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wW3NCPlLniI

[DaleH]

I suspect its related to manufacturing capability.

I would reason it is far more for production tooling costs & setup than capability ...

Think about it, as an example, when the Thompson/Center factory building muzzleloaders (straight profile barrels) in NH burned down, the biggest obstscle to any rebuild attempt was the cost to replace the tooling.

[Reverend Mauser]

I suspect its related to manufacturing capability.

I would reason it is far more for production tooling costs & setup than capability ...

Think about it, as an example, when the Thompson/Center factory building muzzleloaders (straight profile barrels) in NH burned down, the biggest obstscle to any rebuild attempt was the cost to replace the tooling.

That's what I'm basically trying to say.

I got ahold of a scholarly book once that said in the 19th century, tooling was the big issue for the Russians small arms. They inevitably imported a weapon before making it themselves because they didn't immediately possess the tooling. The M91 and the Nagant revolver both fit in that category.

I don't know this for sure as the book ended with 1900, but I strongly suspect that carried over into the Soviet era after the revolution, especially when the communists wanted to industrialize the nation. It would make sense to stick with what they had.