American made mauser?

The rifle I have mentioned above can be seen on Gunbroker. Click on "rifle" and then type in mauser. It will appear on the first page as the auction ends soon. Also you will see on the same page a 1945 mauser called a last ditch rifle with poorly welded on handle and bent tin sights. This rifle doesnt show many close up photos but you can easily see the defects.
 
Japan had a shortage and supposedly even made some recievers from cast iron, so I am wondering if German as well had metal supply problems as well?
Click to expand...

It wasn't that they used cast iron, they cut back on the heat treatment of the late war Type 99 rifles the so-called "Last Ditch rifles"...


If anyone tells you that the early war Type 99 rifles or the Type 38 rifles are inferior, they are ignorant...
 
Last edited:
"The study of mausers is a field I am just now dabbling into."

Obviously, and you seem to be picking up a fair amount of bad information in the process.

Jim
 
Interarms, Remington and Whitworth were all Zastava (Serb) actions just re-branded by the importer. Parker Hale and Santa Fe Mausers were made in Eastern Bloc countries IIRC as well. Ruger's are the only rifle action with a Mauser style claw extractor that I know of that are cast.
Click to expand...

LaCoruna provided Spanish made-Mauser rifles that were virtually identical to the Zastava-built InterArms MarkX rifle. I have two LaCoruna actions and they even interchange parts with a MarkX action. The actions are still available from time to time.
 
300 WEATHERBY AND JIM K, I am not trrying to argue I am trying to learn. I am an avid reader of gun design and research manuals, writings, books. I hope someone more knowledgable than I will chime in as well. I can recall reading somewhere years ago about Japan building some of their actions from cast iron. Can somebody direct me to a site either pro or con on this subject. I know not all last ditch Japanese rifles were cast iron recievers but I clearly remember reading about them somewhere. Now back to the subject of 98mausers. Jim, you have a reputation for being a straight shooter and knowledgable without many axes to grind so your opinion is valued. However I have done quite a bit of research and believe my comments so far to be correct. Can you enlighten me as to any of my errors?
 
30-30 Rem. You're getting some bad info. let me get the Jap rifles taken care of first. If you get one for any reason, remove it from the stock. If the lower tang it two piece, it's not a cast gun. I had one that was given to me from a eturning GI that was a friend of my dd.
'Regarding mausers, while I am by no means an expert, I am a bit of a Mauser freak. Most of my custom rifles are based on Mausers. My .35 Whelen is based on an Oberndorf action, definitely German and probably the nicest Mauser I own. Whether in original condition it was shot in anger and U.S. troops is something I don't know and frankly don't care. At one time, I had a 1944 issue mauser with stamped trigger guard and laminated stock that someone more or less bubba'd into a European style sporter using a Springfield barrel making the gun a 30-06. I got into it cheap and it was one of the be 30-06's I ever owned. Very acurate with a nice double stage trigger. The work was done where it counted. A rough exterior does not mean the internalwere also rough although by 1945 things probably did get rushed a bit. The 1090 Argentines are very good action although sometime a bit soft and needing reheat treatment. I built a .280 Rem. on one. Thr 1912 Steyrs are good actions, too short for rounds like the 30-06 but greay for the .257 Robt. and 7x57, which I believe was the original cartridge on th guns made for Chile. Mine is all original and was arsenal converted to 7.62 NATO. I have another that was made into an ultralight rifle weighing just 5 pounds with scope, sling and a full magazine. The Steyrs were made in Austria. FN made quite a few sporting rifles in various calibers including some nice, if a bit heavy .270's and 30-06's for Sears under the J.C. Higgins label. FN furnished the actions and High Standard built the rifle which have a chrome lined bore BTW. A book you might find interesting if you can find a copy is MAUSER RIFLES AND PISTOLS by W.H.B. Smith copyright 1946, 1947, 1948 and 1954. The NRA sold a reprint combining that book with one on Walther pistols, the reprint titled WALTHER PISTOLS and MAUSER RIFLES AND PISTOLS. It's a pretty thorough book on the subject. Frank de Haas has a book called BOLT ACTION RIFLES that does a fair job on Mausers.
I guess my point is, some Mausers may not be pretty on the outside but it's what's inside.
FWIW, there 1903 Springfield for the most part were very well made with lots of had fitting. Once they got the heat treating problem taken care of they were very good rifles and extremely accurate for rifles of their day. Then came the 1903 A3 with it's stamped partsand later two groove barrels. make us just as guilty as the germans during WW2.
I don't consider the Springfield, Winchester M70, pre-64 or otherwise, Ruger M77, 1917 Enfield or the Remington M700s anything more than modified Mauser and some of the modifications were not all that great. They're just Mauser wannabees. :rolleyes:
Paul B.
 
EMCON, crudely built compared to pre war commercial action. The old adage is to not buy any military gun from a losing army in the last years of the war. If you will take a close look, you will see many shortcuts, stamped tin parts, many machining marks, poor fit and finish.
Click to expand...

The Kriegsmodell didn't really appear until the end of 44, at which point they had been in production ~10 years. Looking at the production numbers here, even discounting the numbers of "unknown" you still get ~14.2 million rifles built, with 10.2 million built through the end of 1943, plus another ~3.2 million in 44 and 700K in 1945.

Even if you are unbelievably optimistic and say half of the 1944 rifles were simplified Kriegsmodell variants, that only makes 2.3 million of the 14.2 million rifles produced "crude", if you want to call them that. The actual number is certainly far lower than that.

Mine is from 1940, and even though it was abused/reworked by the Soviets, The action is still slick as snot, and locks up like a bank vault. The only things "Crude" about it is the Russian bluing job and the stock, but that is not from the manufacture, but the use/abuse. The stock looks like it belongs on a rifle from the losing side of a war.

k98k.jpg


Lots of good information here:
http://www.latewar.com/html/kriegsmodel.htm
http://kriegsmodell.com/
http://www.wehrmacht-awards.com/uniforms_firearms/firearms/98k/k98index.htm
And lots of photo threads here:
http://forums.gunboards.com/forumdisplay.php?6-The-K98-Mauser-Forum

On Edit: If you want crude, look at the machining on a 1942 Mosin Nagant.
 
PAULB and EMCON, the imformation you provided is the type of imformation I am desiring though I still believe I have stated most of my posts correctly. Paul, I was not stating that ALL Japanese rifles were cast iron, I was saying that I read that towards the end of the was they supposedly experemented with cast iron recievers. The driving force for Japan to attack us in WWII was our embargo of oil anD scrap metal both of which they were in short supply before the war. And I also didnt state the were cast recievers, I said they were cast IRON recievers. Cast iron and steel are two different metals entirely. It is interesting imfo about the 1909 Argentine actions being soft. I have always heard they were the premier action in which custom gunsmiths built very high dollar guns from. I have read and own Haas's book on mausers and others as well. This is what has sparked my intrest. And I am not arguing the point that the allies didnt use stamped tin and spot welding. This was never a " mines better than yours thread". I am well aware of our use of corner cutting production. One of my contintions is, when things are going wrong and supplys are short and skilled labor is hard to find, does quality suffer even though the design is good? Lastly I dont feel that any gun that has a bolt and 2 front locking lugs are mauser knock offs. There are enough difference in the pre-64 model 70's 1903's Springfields and Enfield's that I dont believe they compareable, though they did learn from th mausers. IIRC the patent infringement suit the US had to pay Germany wasnt on the gun itself but from the stripper clips.
 
To the best of my knowledge there are no true M98 rifles built in the US. Several companies have imported them, but they were manufactured overseas.

The BRNO/CZ rifles are good, commercial 98s.

standard.jpg


standard.jpg


standard.jpg



The fact this rifle may have been fired at Allied troops in the Ardennes doesn't bother me a whit. It's a tool and there's nothing inherently evil about it.

standard.jpg
 
Whew, I thoght I was losing my memory. If you will go to google and type in "Japanese WWII cast iron guns" you will find in one of the first searchs an old AuctionArms website with a Japanese rifle with many of its parts built from cast iron The reciever is also made of cast iron. Im glad my memory wasnt slipping that fast.
 
EMCON5, that is the rifle I was refering to. It had been so long since I had read about these that I cant recall much. The fact it is rifled make me BELIEVE it was an actual combat rifle but that is all, just a gut feeling. This has been an interesting thread. I first started it off to learn about any potential Ameican made 98 mausers. We quickly went to moral issues to studies in metalurgy. As stated I am just now trying to learn about the 98 variaties and histories. I am not as versed in these as I am in Winchester model 12's and 70's and am interested in all verifiable imformation. I am not ignorant about the design as I have studied it for awhile now but their are so many varients that Im not sure I will ever feel comfortable saying I am a mauser man. I believe everything I stated in above posts to be correct but am always willing to concede any point if it can be verified in a reputable research publication. You appear to be quite knowledgeable on the different manufacterers so I hope I can rely on you for future imfo now and again.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top