View Full Version : Varnished stocks
I went to one of my favorite gun shows today that’s held every few months and saw a lot more battle rifles for sale than usual. I came away wondering why some people have this unfortunate urge to sand off all the cartouches and varnish the stock of a perfectly good battle rifle. I saw a M1 Garand, an Enfield No. 4 Mk 2, an Eddystone M1917 and a M1903 Springfield with varnished stocks. The M1 looked really bad. I suppose replacement stocks could be found and maybe some uninformed individual might think the varnish looks cool.
My trapdoor was varnished and looked sad when I bought it several years ago. The asking price was pretty cheap. The bore looked good and I saw that the varnish/poly was loose and peeling in several places, probably because of the oil in the stock. I gently peeled off the rest of the varnish and found that the rack numbers and cartouches were still fairly bold, although Bubba decided to carve a hand grip in the underside of the fore stock. I rubbed in some Ballistol oil that brought up the color of the grain and it looks pretty good. I bought a box of 45-70 black powder cartridges for it a few years ago and may shoot it this year (I say that every year).
I saw an unusual 30-06 Mauser from the 1950s that was for sale. Never knew they were made in that caliber.
S.A. Boggs
04-14-2019, 02:45
Because there are too many bubba's around is the reason for such stupidity.
Sam
I saw an unusual 30-06 Mauser from the 1950s that was for sale. Never knew they were made in that caliber.
Although the commercial side of the Mauser business would make (or license to make) their foreign customers rifles in any caliber they wanted, I don't know of any that were originally built in .30-06. I could be wrong though. However a lot of countries rebuilt their rifles to different calibers, especially after WW II to make them compatible with their post war semi automatic rifles. Heck, some countries rechambered their old Remington Rolling blocks to calibers like 7mm Mauser after they adopted Mauser repeaters in the late 19th century. Since the only country I know of that was making new Mausers after WWII was Yugoslavia and theirs were all 7.92mm, I suspect your rifle was re-barreled to .30-06 by a country like Brazil. The crest on the receiver should tell the tale.
Although the commercial side of the Mauser business would make (or license to make) their foreign customers rifles in any caliber they wanted, I don't know of any that were originally built in .30-06. I could be wrong though. However a lot of countries rebuilt their rifles to different calibers, especially after WW II to make them compatible with their post war semi automatic rifles. Heck, some countries rechambered their old Remington Rolling blocks to calibers like 7mm Mauser after they adopted Mauser repeaters in the late 19th century. Since the only country I know of that was making new Mausers after WWII was Yugoslavia and theirs were all 7.92mm, I suspect your rifle was re-barreled to .30-06 by a country like Brazil. The crest on the receiver should tell the tale.
The number .30 (caliber) the date (maybe 1954) and a serial number were the only marks I can remember seeing that we’re stamped on the receiver. It makes sense that Mauser would make a rifle in any caliber desired by the buyer.
Although the commercial side of the Mauser business would make (or license to make) their foreign customers rifles in any caliber they wanted, I don't know of any that were originally built in .30-06. I could be wrong though. However a lot of countries rebuilt their rifles to different calibers, especially after WW II to make them compatible with their post war semi automatic rifles. Heck, some countries rechambered their old Remington Rolling blocks to calibers like 7mm Mauser after they adopted Mauser repeaters in the late 19th century. Since the only country I know of that was making new Mausers after WWII was Yugoslavia and theirs were all 7.92mm, I suspect your rifle was re-barreled to .30-06 by a country like Brazil. The crest on the receiver should tell the tale.
Didn't Israel re-barrel Mausers for 30-06 or was it only for the 308 (7.62x51 NATO) ?
Didn't Israel re-barrel Mausers for 30-06 or was it only for the 308 (7.62x51 NATO) ?
The Israeli's re barreled their assortment of Mauser short rifles to 7.62 NATO to make them compatible with their FN FAL rifles and machine guns. Those rifles are stamped 7.62 in bold letters. The Israelis sold those rifles to wholesalers in the U.S. and they went like hotcakes. The heritage and caliber of the rifles making them extremely desirable.
Merc:
The Yugoslavs made a "scrubbed" export model of their M1948 Mausers called the M48 BO to they'd have "plausible deniability" about the rifles coming from them. The only marking on these rifles was the serial number. They appear to have been made in both straight bold handle and turned down bolt handle models. Your rifle could possibly be an M48 that was surplussed out and the civilian buyer had rechambered to .30-06.
musketshooter
04-14-2019, 07:24
The Dutch police and military used original 30-06 Mauser short rifles. I have one.
"...uninformed individual..." This one. Some people think they're improving the thing by refinishing it.
"...Israeli's re barreled..." They bought 'em that way. Most Israeli Mausers were made by FN and/or the Czechs after W.W. II specifically for Israel. Any of 'em sold to wholesalers in the U.S. weren't rebarreled by Israel for resale. That'd cost money they didn't have and wouldn't recover by selling 'em.
"...uninformed individual..." This one. Some people think they're improving the thing by refinishing it.
"...Israeli's re barreled..." They bought 'em that way. Most Israeli Mausers were made by FN and/or the Czechs after W.W. II specifically for Israel. Any of 'em sold to wholesalers in the U.S. weren't rebarreled by Israel for resale. That'd cost money they didn't have and wouldn't recover by selling 'em.
I believe that is (mostly) incorrect.
Most of the Mausers were brought in in the early days of Israel were in 7.92mm Mauser were, in fact, ex NAZI guns, both 98ks and vz 24s used by the Whermacht. The Czechs did make some rifles for the israelis but used a lot of surplus NAZI parts, including receivers and barrels in the process. Virtually all were in 7.92x57 except for a handful donated by Sweden which were in a proprietary Swedish 8 mm cartridge. All were rechambered to 7.62 mm NATO in the late 1950s, interestingly when we had only started to change over to the NATO round ourselves. The Czechs also donated a lot of ex NAZI automatic weapons, especially MG 34s also in 7.92mm Mauser.
Wordpress has an excellent article on this that unfortunately won't "hotlink" but its there for you to "google under wwiiafterwwiiwordpress.com. It's pretty far down in the article which deals with post WWII use of WWII equipment in general.
blackhawknj
04-15-2019, 08:43
I recall that at one time "sporterizing" milsurps was very "chic", "in", they were cheap compared to commercial rifles and displaying your "worksmanip" marked you as a "craftsman". Sort of a "beating swords into ploughshares". Nowadays it's sacrilegious, and many found out it was a lot harder than it looked for meager results.
I have an M1888 Trapdoor Springfield that Bubba got hold of-cut away the fore end and the bayonet mechanism is gone-but it came with the bayonet. ?
Bubba couldn't beat a sword into a plowshear. He'd screw it up somehow. The shellac on wartime rifles was done by shooters who wanted to protect the wood. It's kind of ugly now but it was done with the best intent and it has some good history. Nitwits who insisted on lopping off forearms well...
There was a Swedish proprietary 8? I'd like to hear about it.
FN sold rifles to Israel in the original 8mm caliber and later sold them an entire production line that they apparently used to rebuild rifles and rebarrel them to .308. There are some original Mauser rifles in 30 ‘06 as mentioned specifically the Dutch rifles manufactured by FN.
There was a Swedish proprietary 8? I'd like to hear about it.
Sure, its an interesting story. The Swedes adopted the U.S. M1917 machine gun after WW I, but found their 6.5mm cartridge did not have adequate long range performance. To correct that they built their own 7.92 mm cartridge and a modification kit for the M1917. The cartridge was the 7.92x63mm Patron M32 which fired a 219 gr FMJ boat tail bullet about 2500 fps. Conversion kits for the gun were also made in .30-06 and 7.62 mm NATO. A proprietary Swedish mount and superb optical sights were reputed to make it the most accurate water cooled heavy machine gun ever made. A plate on the side of the gun gave data for each cartridge it could handle. The guns were finally taken out of Swedish service in 1990 but most are still held in reserve. R. Lee Ermey had one demonstrated on his program in .30-06. Quite an impressive weapon.
The Swedes received some K 98 ks from the NAZIs during WWII and modified them to 7.92x63 in which caliber they were unsatisfactory, the recoil was so punishing that it was said to cause actual physical damage. The Swedes were so anxious to get rid of them that they were gifted to the Israelis.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DVEi11KgTCQ
I think one thing to remember when it comes to this thread - right after WWII the world was awash in excess Mauser rifles. I've read several articles on the Israeli rifles and they took them from all comers in 7.92x57. They had lots of K 98 Ks as well as Czech rifles and FN rifles made for a veritable host of foreign countries. FN, in fact made some scratch rifles for Israel even though that couldn't have been cost effective for the Israelis, but then they really needed rifles and the caliber of choice for them in the early years was 7.92mm Mauser. An American Rifleman article showed FN pre WW II rifles, FN Ethiopian rifles and FN Lithuanian rifles that all ended up in Israeli service and were eventually converted to 7.62mm NATO. To the Israelis, in the early days of their nation, any 7.92mm Mauser 98 Short rifle was a good rifle.
Bubba couldn't beat a sword into a plowshear. He'd screw it up somehow. The shellac on wartime rifles was done by shooters who wanted to protect the wood. It's kind of ugly now but it was done with the best intent and it has some good history. Nitwits who insisted on lopping off forearms well...
There was a Swedish proprietary 8? I'd like to hear about it.
Not that I care that the thread took a Mauser direction. But I would like to get some opinions on preservation vs. improvements.
I can say that the varnished stocks that I saw were not being preserved. If that was the case, then the dents, dings, cartouches and inspector marks would still be visible. No, these stocks were heavily sanded so that nothing remained.
My 1943 Remington 03-A3 that I bought from Cabelas Gun Library in Wheeling, WV a few years ago was preserved in a very heavy coating of cosmoline that took some serious time to remove because it had hardened over the past 70+ years. The rifle was rebuilt after WW2 because it had several Smith Corona parts here and there plus a M1903 Springfield extractor with a worn claw. I found NOS replacement parts on the Internet and it’s now as good as it can be (and no varnish). All measurements are nearly perfect and it shoots well.
My question: It’s obvious that the former owner left the rifle in its post war, cosmoline covered condition. I cleaned it and made it into a parts correct shooter. Would you have left it in its original condition?
It’s interesting the direction this thread went once I mentioned the 30-06 Mauser, almost as an after thought. We’re all learning a few things about the Mauser’s history.
What the op saw in 30/06 was probably a 1950 Belgian. 20,000 were made for Belgian naval forces
[QUOTE=Merc;555562]Not that I care that the thread took a Mauser direction. But I would like to get some opinions on preservation vs. improvements.
I can say that the varnished stocks that I saw were not being preserved. If that was the case, then the dents, dings, cartouches and inspector marks would still be visible. No, these stocks were heavily sanded so that nothing remained./QUOTE]
OK, here's mine.
The people in the military who used the WWII and Korean War era rifles for their intended purpose, for the most part, weren't interested in preserving them in their original condition. In fact, the people I knew who actually fought the war, had no further interest in the weapons they used in battle. They did look on the surplus military weapons as mostly the basis for something else. Bubba was probably a WWII or Korean War vet. When I bought my first milsurp, a fresh from FTR No.1 Mk III* SMLE my father who saw action in the Philippines, was frankly flummoxed. He saw it as an instrument solely for taking human life and he'd seen enough of that. I did "bubba" it since a whole industry, back then, was created to help folks do just that. It now sports a nice Bishop walnut stock, a Williams Foolproof receiver sight, had the charger bridge and original rear sight removed and a nice blue job. I killed my first deer with it and a few more. My brother's best friend's father, who had the Barton torpedoed out from under him during the First Naval Battle of Guadalcanal was a big hunter and the owner of some fine firearms. His DCM M1903A3 was taken out of the USGI wood and dropped into a Fajen stock. Other than that it was unaltered and became his backup deer rifle. I could go on but I think the point is made. Interestingly one of the most "bubba-ed" rifles is the SKS 45 even in its most collectable forms.
I personally think a collector should own at least one quality post war "bubba" job, some of them are actually very nice.
I own some nice milsurps I would never think of modifying any of them today, they're just to valuable in their current form and I appreciate what they symbolize. I shoot them all. I also have a bit of remorse about the Enfield, but just a bit.
A while back some No 4 Mk 1 Enfields were imported in the original factory mummy wrap. Many collectors didn't unwrap them considering them more valuable in the true new old stock condition and its hard to argue with that. I bought one and occasionally shoot it. Either course is ok IMHO
So I respect the attitudes of the users of these weapons who had little use for them in their original configuration when they were done with them in the military. I understand that to most folks up until the 1980s they were just an inexpensive basis for a deer rifle. I also understand that military surplus rifles are drying up and preserving them should be a pretty darn high priority and would discourage folks from modifying any of them now. Heck, the rifles have become so valuable in their original form that, again IMHO, the current form of "Bubba-izing" is passing them off as original by "correcting" them including the use of dummied up cartouches. Mitchell's Mausers anyone???
My devalued $.05 worth.
You are absolutely right, there was some very good work done on milsurps. The Model 30 is a rifle I'd sure like own. That and a few others.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.