Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 40

Thread: A general 30-06 Question for the SMEs

  1. #21
    Quote Originally Posted by okie john View Post
    Most cheap 30-06 factory ammo is loaded for deer hunters, so performance is optimized for that. Buy it, use it in confidence, and don’t sweat the twist rate. 1:10 is standard for the 30-06 for one reason: the 30-03 needed it for 220-grain bullets and it was too expensive to rebarrel 75,000 rifles when we switched to the 30-06. The gubmint pulled the barrels, cut off the back ends off, rechambered them, and reinstalled them. If we were starting today without that limitation, the twist would probably be 1:12, which is standard for the 30-30 and the 308 Winchester.

    As for the rifle itself, I applaud your choice. I live just outside Tacoma, WA, where Tradewinds used to be. We see lots of these rifles on used racks around here and I've owned six or seven of them, all in 30-06.

    Different variants got different model numbers, but 1640 typically refers to the action. I’ve seen three variants on the 1640 action. The first and least common has a Monte Carlo buttstock and a Mannlicher forend. The second has a Monte Carlo buttstock and a Schnable forend. The third has a standard buttstock (lots of drop at the comb and heel) and a Schnable forend. The first and third types are usually walnut. The second is usually a light-colored hardwood that may be either birch or beech.

    Unfortunately, recoil in all three types tend to split the web of the stock, but glass bedding fixes that. All of mine had 1:12 twist barrels and most were very accurate with cheap factory ammo.

    Barrels came in three lengths: 20.5”, 22”, and 24”. Every Mannlicher gun I’ve seen had a 20.5” barrel and all Monte Carlo/Schnable guns had 22” barrels. I’ve seen all three lengths on the standard/Schnable rifles.

    All three are very light, and IIRC, all have low iron sights. The standard/Schnable rifles are stocked perfectly for these sights, which means they’re too low for a scope. But if you put a peep on them, then you have a slick little carbine that’s no longer or heavier than a 30-30 but has twice the reach. The Monte Carlo/Schnable guns fit me almost perfectly and are ideal for offhand shooting. They’re my choice for scoped use.

    I've owned three 20.5” guns in 30-06 and I think the barrel is too short for it. That said, the only one I still own is a 20.5” that my father gave me. A few years ago, my son used it to clobber a 200-ish pound hog in California with a 165-grain Remington CoreLokt bullet handloaded to 2,550 FPS. That hog was bigger than most deer and everything worked perfectly.

    A few other things to know about them:
    • Most of them have military-type triggers, which are a lot like Glock triggers. Timney makes the upgrade you need.
    • At some point, any 1640 will stop ejecting and cases will dribble out of the action. That's because the ejector is tensioned by a little leaf spring that's held in place by a screw and the screw backs out. Re-tighten the screw, add a dab of red LocTite, and you'll be back in business.
    • The serial number is on the barrel, not the action. If you rebarrel it, then your smith needs to carry the number over.
    • Many commercial 98 aftermarket parts will work, often with little or no fitting. So will most tuning tricks that apply to Mausers. Brownell’s is a good source of information on parts for them.
    • The 1900 action (push feed) replaced the 1640 in the late 60s.
    • The 1640 had two types of bottom metal: steel and alloy. You can tell by the floorplate latch. On earlier guns, the latch is a folded steel spring. On later guns, it’s a protrusion inside the trigger guard like on a Model 700 Remington. Stocks inletted for one won’t work with the other.
    • The front of the alloy magazine can get dented under recoil if you shoot a lot, but this may not be a problem with cartridges less powerful than the 30-06 or if you don’t load the 30-06 to the maximum.

    If you like older lightweight rifles with wood stocks and you hunt in bad weather, a 22” 1640 glass bedded into a beech Monte Carlo/Schnable stock with a 4x scope is a superb choice.

    I think they stand up well to the pre-64 Model 70 Featherweight.

    Let me know if you have questions.


    Okie John
    Any recommendations for a guy looking to rebarrel an old 1640? It was my father's gun, and I've shot a few deer with it. Super handy to carry, mad nostalgia points, but I can't get anything better than 2 MOA no matter what I try (different loads, glass bedding, checking all the screw torques, different scope, etc). Which is pretty annoying in the age of Tikka.

    I'm kinda thinking about putting a 18"-ish threaded barrel on and suppressing it.

    Thanks,
    James

  2. #22
    Quote Originally Posted by JDB View Post
    Any recommendations for a guy looking to rebarrel an old 1640? It was my father's gun, and I've shot a few deer with it. Super handy to carry, mad nostalgia points, but I can't get anything better than 2 MOA no matter what I try (different loads, glass bedding, checking all the screw torques, different scope, etc). Which is pretty annoying in the age of Tikka.

    I'm kinda thinking about putting a 18"-ish threaded barrel on and suppressing it.

    Thanks,
    James
    What's it chambered for now?


    Okie John
    “The reliability of the 30-06 on most of the world’s non-dangerous game is so well established as to be beyond intelligent dispute.” Finn Aagaard
    "Don't fuck with it" seems to prevent the vast majority of reported issues." BehindBlueI's

  3. #23
    Quote Originally Posted by okie john View Post
    What's it chambered for now?


    Okie John
    30-06. Never really considered any other caliber for it. Having a short/lighter 30-06 is appealing, especially suppressed. Maybe even go 16 or 17" an suppressed.


    Although...I got a hankering for a 300wsm, 7mm PRC, and or a 280AI as well, figured I'd do that in a Tikka or 700 based action.

  4. #24
    Quote Originally Posted by Bruce Cartwright View Post
    Okie John:

    Can you provide any more details about the rear sight ghost ring set up? That is a very neat idea and one that merits more investigation from my end. This looks like a decent way to put a usable back up iron sight on a rifle normally reserved used with a scope. Is the gunsmith still in business?

    Thanks in advance for your help with this.

    Bruce
    Of course.

    Redfield made the base with the built-in peep. This is their one-piece design, but they made two-piece versions.

    Name:  Screen Shot 2023-04-04 at 1.08.49 PM.jpg
Views: 284
Size:  38.2 KB

    You can find them on eBay.

    https://www.ebay.com/itm/353341561044

    If you're OK with the Redfield mounting system, then you're done.

    The base on my rifle is whichever run-of-the-mill Weaver fits the bridge of a 1640. Mr. Cloward is no longer in business, but anyone who can drill and tap two small holes should be able to fix you up.


    Okie John
    “The reliability of the 30-06 on most of the world’s non-dangerous game is so well established as to be beyond intelligent dispute.” Finn Aagaard
    "Don't fuck with it" seems to prevent the vast majority of reported issues." BehindBlueI's

  5. #25
    Quote Originally Posted by JDB View Post
    30-06. Never really considered any other caliber for it. Having a short/lighter 30-06 is appealing, especially suppressed. Maybe even go 16 or 17" an suppressed.


    Although...I got a hankering for a 300wsm, 7mm PRC, and or a 280AI as well, figured I'd do that in a Tikka or 700 based action.
    The 1640 is set up for 0.473" cartridges, so I'd stick with one of those. Your rifle was born to be a 30-06 so I'm not sure I'd change it.

    That said, you're at a fork in the road. You've spent cash to get the rifle bedded and it has sentimental value, so the cost of a new barrel might not matter. If it does, then you might consider a different action.


    Okie John
    “The reliability of the 30-06 on most of the world’s non-dangerous game is so well established as to be beyond intelligent dispute.” Finn Aagaard
    "Don't fuck with it" seems to prevent the vast majority of reported issues." BehindBlueI's

  6. #26
    Quote Originally Posted by okie john View Post
    Of course.

    Redfield made the base with the built-in peep. This is their one-piece design, but they made two-piece versions.

    Name:  Screen Shot 2023-04-04 at 1.08.49 PM.jpg
Views: 284
Size:  38.2 KB

    You can find them on eBay.

    https://www.ebay.com/itm/353341561044

    If you're OK with the Redfield mounting system, then you're done.

    The base on my rifle is whichever run-of-the-mill Weaver fits the bridge of a 1640. Mr. Cloward is no longer in business, but anyone who can drill and tap two small holes should be able to fix you up.


    Okie John
    Okie John:

    Many thanks for the information and photograph. I had no idea anything like that was even made. I will get one and get it mounted up on my Model 70. I like auxiliary back up iron sights and that is the neatest setup I have ever seen. Add a decent sourdough front post and I would be living large. Again, many thanks.

    Bruce
    Bruce Cartwright
    Owner & chief instructor-SAC Tactical
    E-mail: "info@saconsco.com"
    Website: "https://saconsco.com"

  7. #27
    Quote Originally Posted by Bruce Cartwright View Post
    Okie John:

    Many thanks for the information and photograph. I had no idea anything like that was even made. I will get one and get it mounted up on my Model 70. I like auxiliary back up iron sights and that is the neatest setup I have ever seen. Add a decent sourdough front post and I would be living large. Again, many thanks.

    Bruce
    No worries. I learned about them from Finn Aagaard.


    Okie John
    “The reliability of the 30-06 on most of the world’s non-dangerous game is so well established as to be beyond intelligent dispute.” Finn Aagaard
    "Don't fuck with it" seems to prevent the vast majority of reported issues." BehindBlueI's

  8. #28
    Site Supporter
    Join Date
    Feb 2016
    Location
    In the desert, looking for water.
    Quote Originally Posted by JDB View Post
    Any recommendations for a guy looking to rebarrel an old 1640? It was my father's gun, and I've shot a few deer with it. Super handy to carry, mad nostalgia points, but I can't get anything better than 2 MOA no matter what I try (different loads, glass bedding, checking all the screw torques, different scope, etc). Which is pretty annoying in the age of Tikka.

    I'm kinda thinking about putting a 18"-ish threaded barrel on and suppressing it.

    Thanks,
    James
    Just being real here: Is there some kind of deer hunting you do that your dad’s old rifle, at 2 MOA, won’t take care of? I mean, 300 yards, that’s still a kill shot on any deer …

  9. #29
    Ready! Fire! Aim! awp_101's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2017
    Location
    DFW
    Quote Originally Posted by JDB View Post
    Any recommendations for a guy looking to rebarrel an old 1640? It was my father's gun, and I've shot a few deer with it. Super handy to carry, mad nostalgia points, but I can't get anything better than 2 MOA no matter what I try (different loads, glass bedding, checking all the screw torques, different scope, etc). Which is pretty annoying in the age of Tikka.

    I'm kinda thinking about putting a 18"-ish threaded barrel on and suppressing it.

    Thanks,
    James
    If it were mine, I’d just accept the accuracy it’s capable of and put the project money towards a Tikka if that’s the standard you’re going to measure it by.
    Nothing so needs reforming as other people's habits - Mark Twain

    Tact is the knack of making a point without making an enemy / Where is the wisdom we have lost in knowledge?

  10. #30
    Quote Originally Posted by awp_101 View Post
    If it were mine, I’d just accept the accuracy it’s capable of and put the project money towards a Tikka if that’s the standard you’re going to measure it by.
    Or hunt with the 1640 and spend the Tikka money on ammo, tags, and licenses.

    It's easy to get wrapped around the axle on group size. Deer have an 8" vital zone and elk are even bigger, but few hunters ever see either beyond about 175 yards. At that range, 2 MOA is still less than half the size of the deer's vital zone, so a 2 MOA rifle will put a lot of meat on the table IF you shoot it well.

    So, yeah, marksmanship...

    I have a rifle that's consistently sub-MOA from the bench. As soon as I get a zero, I train from field-expedient positions. Even that rifle cannot save me from a bad trigger squeeze in offhand, kneeling, sitting, prone over a brush pile, etc.

    Shooting steel changed my mind on this: I know instantly whether I hit something that's the size of the vital zone on the animal I'm hunting. Instead of losing sleep over fractions of something, the issue becomes getting hits. And as soon as you get the MOA monkey off your back, you can work on getting hits quickly, which matters far more when you have a deer in your crosshairs.

    A poster on another site used to say that a thousand things can happen when you shoot at game beyond 300 yards and only one of them is good. He was right.


    Okie John
    “The reliability of the 30-06 on most of the world’s non-dangerous game is so well established as to be beyond intelligent dispute.” Finn Aagaard
    "Don't fuck with it" seems to prevent the vast majority of reported issues." BehindBlueI's

User Tag List

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •