Mausingfield or TL3

chris514scott

New to the sport and anxious to learn
Full Member
Minuteman
Jan 24, 2009
419
85
Oklahoma
I want to build a 6.5 Creed in a JAE stock and need help with the action

To start I want to say that I have read for days on this site about the two actions and this isn't a blind lazy question.

Any time I see these actions compared it seems to come down to cost, coating, and swapping barrels, ugly bolt handle

1. Cost is not an issue
2. They are both DLC now
3. If I buy the Mausingfield from PVA he will have the measurements on file to spin up any barrel I need without needing the action.
4. I don't think the Mausingfield bolt handle is ugly

So with all that said why would one choose the Bighorn over the Mausingfield?


Thanks for your input.
 

Supersubes

Heathen
Full Member
Minuteman
  • Sep 6, 2006
    6,345
    5,964
    Rural Nevada
    I want to build a 6.5 Creed in a JAE stock and need help with the action

    To start I want to say that I have read for days on this site about the two actions and this isn't a blind lazy question.

    Any time I see these actions compared it seems to come down to cost, coating, and swapping barrels, ugly bolt handle

    1. Cost is not an issue
    2. They are both DLC now
    3. If I buy the Mausingfield from PVA he will have the measurements on file to spin up any barrel I need without needing the action.
    4. I don't think the Mausingfield bolt handle is ugly

    So with all that said why would one choose the Bighorn over the Mausingfield?


    Thanks for your input.

    This is a personal preference, and you’re gonna get a split of answers. I prefer the tl3. To contrast the barrel fitting point you brought up, the tl3 is so precise, Josh won’t need take measurements of your receiver. They’re all the same. Not saying the mausingfield isn’t that way, but the tl3 for sure is.


    edit: I think the mausingfield bolt handle is atrocious. Looks like a candle holder. Personal opinion of course.
     

    Xander3Zero

    Just a normal dude.
    Full Member
    Minuteman
    Aug 10, 2017
    499
    281
    Rhode Island
    I don't own either, but from reading here on the forums, and reading about Bighorn and Mausingfield in general, I don't you could go wrong with either. They are both fantastic top notch actions from all I have seen. Mausingfield's website has quite a bit of technical information regarding the features, design, safety and testing of their actions.

    Another thing to consider is that I believe the Bighorn is a traditional 50/50 action meaning roughly half of the firing pin cocking happens on bolt lift and the other half during bolt close. I believe that the Mausingfield is now only offered as a 105/-5, meaning that all the firing pin cocking happens on bolt lift, which does result in a slightly heavier bolt lift. I think there was a thread about this recently, I will try to find and post the link here.

    Here you go: https://www.snipershide.com/shooting/forum/...d-mausingfield

    Also some good info in this older thread: https://www.snipershide.com/shootin...s-the-bighorn-tl3-have-the-lightest-bolt-lift

    Look for LongRifles Inc's posts, they are very informative IMO.
     
    Last edited:

    Supersubes

    Heathen
    Full Member
    Minuteman
  • Sep 6, 2006
    6,345
    5,964
    Rural Nevada
    I don't own either, but from reading here on the forums, and reading about Bighorn and Mausingfield in general, I don't you could go wrong with either. They are both fantastic top notch actions from all I have seen. Mausingfield's website has quite a bit of technical information regarding the features, design, safety and testing of their actions.

    Another thing to consider is that I believe the Bighorn is a traditional 50/50 action meaning roughly half of the firing pin cocking happens on bolt lift and the other half during bolt close. I believe that the Mausingfield is now only offered as a 105/-5, meaning that all the firing pin cocking happens on bolt lift, which does result in a slightly heavier bolt lift. I think there was a thread about this recently, I will try to find and post the link here.

    Here you go: https://www.snipershide.com/shootin...tion-rifles/6835333-new-improved-mausingfield


    The tl3 is a 105/-5 like a standard Remington or mausingfield.

     

    padom

    SuperMod
    Staff member
    Moderator
    Supporter
    Full Member
    Minuteman
  • Mar 13, 2013
    10,397
    5,257
    Southeastern, Pennsylvania
    Take your pick..comes down to personal preference, you can't go wrong with either. I have 2 TL3's and wouldn't mind a bit if they were both Mausingfields
     

    kthomas

    Sergeant
    Full Member
    Minuteman
    Jun 17, 2009
    3,646
    4,351
    34
    Tucson, AZ
    At the end of the day they are performing the same function: pushing a round into the chamber, and then pulling it back out

    Is one going to make you shoot any better over the other? No. Is one going to perform any better than the other? No, not by any appreciable or noticable difference. At the end of a day of shooting, you will be just has happy with either.

    At this tier, there isn't really any wrong answer. You are over thinking it. Pick one and roll with it, and enjoy it.
     

    SuperSneakySniper

    Sergeant
    Full Member
    Minuteman
    Feb 16, 2017
    966
    244
    There are differences but theyre both great actions. Ive owned TL3s and ive fondled a pair of Mausingfields.
    Some subtle differences are: the TL3 has a noticably lighter bolt lift. While the Mausingfield seemed to drag/bind less. The Bighorn doesnt drag or bind much (its only when im being REALLY sloppy with the bolt), but in comparison, it does so more than the Mausingfield. Both of them are just as smooth when operated normally.

    Personally I picked TL3 because i liked the price and the way it looks more. I know the Mausingfield bolt knob appearance is a petty thing to be concerned about but whether people will admit it or not, looks matter when youre talking about a $1200-1600 action. Getting exactly what we want is the reason why we get "Custom" rigs in the first place. But since you dont mind the looks though, more power to ya!

    Best of luck. At least you are choosing between two great actions, its a good problem to have :)
     

    Ledzep

    Chancellor
    Full Member
    Minuteman
  • Jun 9, 2009
    3,462
    3,139
    NE
    I very slightly prefer the Mausingfield but it's personal preference more than anything. I like the material(s) they're made from, I like the Mauser extractor, and I like the keyed scope base.

    I'm also a fan of the other little features the Mausingfield has (toroidal lugs, extractor cams away from the case as the bolt closes, etc..) but for functional purposes they're trivial.

    That said, Bighorn is #2 on my list. They feel awesome and have all of the features that matter. Bolt heads are cheaper than the MF, also.

    As far as the MF bolt handle.... Any gunsmith or machinist with any amount of experience on a lathe can make you a replacement for maybe $20-30. It's a 10-30 minute job depending on how complex you want it to be. I've made several renditions for mine now.
     

    LongRifles Inc.

    Lance Criminal
    Full Member
    Minuteman
  • Mar 14, 2010
    5,837
    4,429
    50
    Sturgis, S. Dakota
    www.longriflesinc.com
    3. If I buy the Mausingfield from PVA he will have the measurements on file to spin up any barrel I need without needing the action.


    I would advise you to consider what I have to say about this. That statement is false. ARC will be the first to tell you that it is best to have "action in hand" because (if for no other reason) it is a controlled round feed action. Late-model production Mausingfields no longer have DLC'd extractors. They are instead machined from 17-4 Stainless steel. This was done at my urging of ARC to address the need for setting up the feeding behavior of the action, all of which is influenced by the choice of DBM, magazine, how it rides in the stock, and by the cartridge itself. The scope is so broad and wide that it's literally impossible to try and capture this with a one size fits all mentality. It's very disheartening to have a brand new action with fancy DLC coating that someone had to grind off in order to make the extractor work right.

    CRF actions featuring nonrotating claw extractors are hand-fitted by every manufacturer that I know. It's the cost of doing business for an overall more reliable system.


    It's very possible that with a given setup it may run as required right out of the box. I've had "hope diamonds" right out of the box. It's not always the case, however. Shell pressure and entry angle are very relevant to making these things behave correctly.


    Next, Ted will be the first person to tell anyone that the bolt head on a Mausingfield is not a simple part to make. The lug geometry is complex. The mirror of this is lug abutment inside the action. Because of this complexity, there are variations that play directly into the headspace dimension for a given cartridge. If the end-user is satisfied with a barrel nut type setup, then it's a nonissue. The HS dimension can be adjusted accordingly. If you want a more traditional presentation, then the fitting should really be done with action in hand.

    *EDIT: After speaking with ARC regarding this particular topic, I have to retract this a bit. ARC has been controlling the relevant dimensioning to a near zero-tolerance value. I was unaware of this during the time I wrote this so please consider this. It is news to me as well.

    I build more of these than anyone and I have a direct line of communication with the manufacturer. My comments are based on what I've experienced and the advice of the person who designed and manufactures it. I have actions on the shelf as well.

    As far as one vs the other. It's Ford/Chevy. Both make a great piece. I personally like the ARC stuff more as the materials are just so tough and robust. I've devoted 4x years now to actively trying to "kill" my 1st gen Mausingfield. I have done things to it nobody does. (600 round fire form torture test into a water-cooled barrel with ZERO lubrication present on the action for instance) The list goes on...

    It is the most robust action available today and the heritage is based on the two most battlefield-proven components of modern warfare: The Springfield and Mauser action.


    Good luck with your project.
     
    Last edited:
    • Like
    Reactions: buggz

    NWnewguy

    Private
    Full Member
    Minuteman
    Nov 10, 2013
    467
    338
    I don't normally respond to these threads, because I'm not sure why anyone would want my opinion. However, I feel a little more qualified to help out with this question. I have three Mausingfields and two Bighorns (yes I have a problem). As stated they are both great actions and you would probably be happy with either one. Both guys that developed the actions are great guys and deserve your business. Both companies are helpful and I have no doubt that in the unlikely event you would need it, their customer service would be top notch. I have put pre-fit barrels on both actions and it worked find on both of them.

    That being said I am a bigger fan of the Mausingfield. I shoot nearly as many coyotes/unwanted critters each year as I shoot steel plates, so I'm not exactly Vegas' frontrunner to win the PRS finale next year, but the Mausingfield just runs. The only meaningful difference I have heard mentioned between the two of them is that the BH can be swapped over to fire 223 based cases. I have two extra BH 223 bolt heads myself and find this to be a big advantage. I have a feeling that in the near future this will no longer be a difference that can be pointed out. Although, due to the much more substantial amount of steel (which I believe is 300M and harder than the gates of hell) and the need for a new extractor claw, there will be a price difference in favor of the BH. When I cycle the Mausingfield, it just feels really substantial and built like things of old, but with modern manufacturing techniques and tolerances. The scope base on the MF is a pretty neat design and bomb proof as well.

    I have three last thoughts for you. First, if at all possible, get ahold of one of each and cycle it a few dozen times. This along with your initial impression of aesthetics and build quality will tell you which one is right for you. Confidence in your rifle will help you shoot better. Second, you can never go wrong getting one of each! If you really weren't impressed with one, you wouldn't lose much selling it. Lastly, you are on the right track considering PVA for a build or barreled action. JK does top notch machine work and is a super stand up guy. I can't say enough positive things there.

    Good luck with your choice and if you have any questions don't hesitate to ask.
     

    .30kal

    Sergeant
    Full Member
    Minuteman
  • Jun 24, 2011
    285
    114
    San Jose, CA
    I had the same dilemma when I was looking to build a LA. I went to SHOT last year and got to handle both actions. I went with the MF as it felt more robust and like the design differences noted noted in prior posts versus making improvements to a Rem 700 type action. The only thing I saw as an advantage with the BH is the easier/cheaper bolt face change. However, I didn't see doing that with my particular project. Unlike the MF, I also was able to bind the BH action. The fact that the MF now comes DLC coated was the closer. I'm looking forward to having Chad @ LRI barrel the action given his depth of knowledge as an early adopter.
     

    karagias

    Sergeant
    Commercial Supporter
    Full Member
    Minuteman
    Jan 24, 2010
    327
    1,098
    51
    Washington
    www.americanrifle.com
    Hi folks. I just spoke with Chad from LRI and as a result, I would like to clarify a few things and convey the most current information regarding the Mausingfield. Chad and I are close friends and talk often but we seldom talk about the Mausingfield because many of the original issues we faced during the early days of production are now behind us. So nowadays we mostly talk about cutting metal and recipes for chocolate chip cookies and tacos.

    So, in regards to the Mauser type claw extractors used in the Mausingfield actions, they no longer require hand fitting for easy feeding. For those of you who are unfamiliar with the Mauser extractor, it's worth knowing that in order to get them to function properly, one must strike a balance between how early the cartridge is engaged by the extractor as it is stripped from the magazine and how easily the rim of the case slips under the claw of the extractor on its way into the chamber. It took a while but I finally got good at this after bringing the manufacturing of the extractors in house where we could revise the design frequently and at little cost. Prior to that, I was purchasing them on the tight side which had feeding implications and necessitated occasional hand fitting. The modification made to the extractor during the fitting process literally took about 15 seconds on a BearTex wheel but it still required a bit of knowledge that few people have, especially those coming from the Remington and Savage worlds. That's all behind us now and nearly all Mausingfield actions leaving the shop these days are leaving with properly functioning extractors.

    In regards to bolt heads and head spacing. We maintain the distance between the bolt face and the face of the receiver at 0.826+/-0.001 inches. Some of the early Mausingfield actions may have ranged between 0.824 and 0.827. Therefore, one can certainly cut a barrel for a Mausingfield action without having the action in hand and I encourage them to do so provided they are equipped with the appropriate and necessary measuring tools for the job.

    The barrel thread specification for the Mausingfield is 1.0625-20 UN 2B. Translation:

    1.0625 inches is the nominal (not actual) thread diameter upon which the thread definition is based.
    UN stands for Unified thread which defines the thread form,
    and 2B specifies the tolerances (or allowances) of the female thread dimensions, i.e. pitch diameter tolerance of 0.0059 inches.

    It's worth noting that if one wishes to assemble a fluted barrel to a Mausingfield, or to any action for that matter, the flutes should be cut into the barrel while it is in the receiver and fully torqued in order to ensure that the flutes are oriented as desired. It is extremely difficult and time consuming to do this without the barrel and the receiver assembled unless a barrel nut is used or you cheat by either over torquing of under torquing the barrel. Also note 7.2 degrees of angular displacement results for every 0.001 inches threaded joint variation. What do you want to do with your time?

    And while we're on the topic of screw threads, I'd like to dispel a myth that is prevalent in the world gunsmithing and rifles. Tightly fitting barrel threads do not promote accuracy. In nearly all facets of manufacturing, it's almost always better to cut the threads near minimum material condition (big female, small male) so that the male and female threads can easily engage one another. There are certainly examples where this may be a bad idea, optics come to mind, but a barrel receiver joint is certainly not one of them. The barrel receiver joint must be stable during the firing event and that stability will come from preload in the thread, which is established by applying lots of torque to the thread. If that's done, the joint will not loosen and the barrel/receiver (and scope assuming proper mounting) relationship will be maintained.

    Lastly, Mausingfield or TL3? Well Mausingfield of course but maybe I'm biased since I designed the Mausingfield. But, I have also designed a floating bolt head T-slot extractor action with a fraction of the effort required to design the Mausingfield so I understand both comprehensively. The Mauser system is easily superior to any other devised before or since. It hides wonderful and subtle details that has resulted in its iconic status among firearms. To truly understand the bolt action, one must understand the Mauser 98. The Mausingfield is a derivative if the Mauser 98 for the following reasons: twenty-seven years of development and 120 years service on battle fields and hunting fields across the world.

    So your choice boils down to this. Functionally compromised and over priced or functionally comprehensive and priced accordingly. You decide.

    Ted
     

    chris514scott

    New to the sport and anxious to learn
    Full Member
    Minuteman
    Jan 24, 2009
    419
    85
    Oklahoma
    Thanks so much for all the responses. Ted after watching several of your videos and reading your response here I have decided to go with your action. Its been the one I wanted all along I was just trying to talk myself out of spending the extra money. I know in the long run I would regret that decision. Now I just need to decide who to purchase it from and who to have make a barrel for it.