1911Forum banner

1 - 4 of 4 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
389 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
A friend of mine has an old Mauser HSc which looks exactly like the one pictured here:


A couple of questions I'm hoping someone can answer:
- I've read that "Kal 7.65mm" is equivalent to .32 ACP. Is this correct?
- Is it safe to use modern .32 ACP ammo in this firearm?
- Are there any differences between 65 gr. vs. 73+ gr. ammo that I should be aware of? (Besides mass of the bullet, obviously!)
- Does this design tend to feed hollowpoints OK, or should he stick with ball ammo?
- It probably had a box of ammo through it about 30 years ago - would shooting any more through it decrease its value significantly?

(I'm not asking for an estimate, if that's a problem. It was his father's gun, and he doesn't want to sell it right now, but is curious to test it out.)

Thanks for any help you can offer!

------------------
"He who goes unarmed in paradise had better be sure that that is where he is."
-- James Thurber

[This message has been edited by Terrato (edited 12-10-2001).]
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,305 Posts
7.65mm and .32 are the same for all practical purposes.

Modern .32 ammo should be just fine if the gun is in sound shooting condition. If in doubt have it checked out by a gunsmith.

I do not know any difference of the two bullets (by weight) you mention. It is likely just variations in weight like 200 and 230-grain .45's.

I would stick to ball ammo, but hoolowpoints won't hurt the gun. They just might not feed as reliably.

From the picture the gun looks in very good condition, but a long way from "mint". Shooting a few boxes of ammo are not going to affect it's value. Don't quote me, but unless it is a particularly rare example, the common garden variety of Mauser HSc run about $250.

Have fun.. I don't have one, but I think they are neat guns - although I'd prefer the .380 model.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,187 Posts
If it were mine I would stick to the 71 grain hardball round, thats what these old HSC's were designed for, there wasn't such a thing as high performance ammo back then.

7th
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
389 Posts
Discussion Starter #4
Thanks for the info.
 
1 - 4 of 4 Posts
Top