[RP]

I don't think my original post on this one made it through all the system coversions, so I am reposting the pics and target from my trip to the range yesterday. I was quite surprised. Very accurate and a pleasure to shoot. Trigger is a bit slick. All in all very pleased. Used garden variety 150grn UMC .30-06.

Educational Moment: I have to admit, I was utterly vexed trying to disassemble it. I couldn't figure out how to remove the cleaning rod and had to walk away for a day just to settle down. In a moment of clarity I finally figured out that you have to depress the rear band retainer to release it. I tried to recall if I ever came across this before and couldn't think of anything.

Cheers,
RP

 

[John Wall]

Pesky Mexican Cleaning Rod

Hi RP,
Excellent photos! I had to smile when I read your "Educational Moment" paragraph. I vividly recall running into the very same problem about 15 years ago when I acquired my first Mexican M.1936. Like you, I finally figured it out, but it took me at least two or three days, with numerous mental health time-outs!

I think what gave it away was a few extra M1893 Mauser cleaning rods that I had purchased from Springfieldf Sporters. It turned out that they were actually Mexican M1910 rods....which are interchangeable with the long 93 rod. I finally realized that these rods have a recess cut into the shaft about 12-15 inches below the slotted tip, and that there must be something that clamps into that recess. That's when I realized that the lower band spring fit into that recess somehow. The rest was easy, with minmal bloodshed.

Fast forwarding to this summer, I had the pleasure of helping Stuart Mowbray, the editor/proprietor of the Man at Arms Press, and Joe Puleo, Man at Arms Technical editor, (both Gunboards members) with a full color how-to book they are doing on the assembly and disassembly of old military rifles. I drove from Boston down to their offices in Rhode Island with a number of rifles from my accumulation, which Stuart and Joe took apart and photographed. I made sure that I brought along a Mexican M1910, which has the same cleaning rod issue as does the M1936 and your M1954. I belive that it will be in the book when it is published this fall.

Looking at your rifle, I was struck at how much it looks like the M.1936. It would appear that aside from lengthing the receiver to accomodate the long .30-06 round, that it is just about the duplicate of the 7 mm M1936. I was surprised to see this given the prevailing concept of the M1954 as a rifle with a stamped triggerguard assembly, 03A3 Springfield-type rear sight and a laminated stock. (See pics in "Book of Rifles" etc). Your rifle clearly proves that the Mexican Army was provided with rifles of M1936 quality, as well as the other type.

Congrtatulations on a great find!
Regards,
John

 

[ARG]

That's the most beautiful Mexican I have ever seen (I'm talking about rifle....)

Looks like it can shoot as well!

Congrats on an excellent find.

Kind regards, ARG

 

[JL]

1954

Hi RP,
Excellent photos! I had to smile when I read your "Educational Moment" paragraph. I vividly recall running into the very same problem about 15 years ago when I acquired my first Mexican M.1936. Like you, I finally figured it out, but it took me at least two or three days, with numerous mental health time-outs!

I think what gave it away was a few extra M1893 Mauser cleaning rods that I had purchased from Springfieldf Sporters. It turned out that they were actually Mexican M1910 rods..which are interchangeable with the lonmg 93 rod. I finally realized that these rods have a recess cut into the shaft about 12-15 inches below the slotted tip, and that there must be something that clamps into that recess. That's when I realized that the lower band spring fit into that recess somehow. The rest was easy, with minmal bloodshed.

Fast forwarding to this summer, I had the pleasure of helping Stuart Mowbray, the editor/proprietor of the Man at Arms Press, and Joe Puleo, Man at Arms Technical editor, (both Gunboards members) with a full color how-to book they are doing on the assembly and disassembly of old military rifles. I drove from Boston down to their offices in Rhode Island with a number of rifles from my accumulation, which Stuart and Joe took apart and photographed. I made sure that I brought along a Mexican M1910, which has the same cleaning rod issue as does the M1936 and your M1954. I belive that it will be in the book when it is published this fall.

Looking at your rifle, I was struck at how much it looks like the M.1936. It would appear that aside fom lengthing the receiver to accomodate the long .30-06 round, that it is just about the duplicate of the 7 mm M1936. I was surprised to see this given the prevailing concept of the M1954 as a rifle with a stamped triggerguard assembly, 03A3 Springfield-type rear sight and a laminated stock. (See pics in "Book of Rifles" etc). Your rifle clearly proves that the Mexican Army was provided with rifles of M1936 quality, as well as the other type.

Congrtatulations on a great find!
Regards,
John

Every one I've seen has been like this. Yet to see one in person with receiver sight, stamped triggerguard or lamiate stock. The 1954 is about one inch longer between the bands than a 1936. JL

 

[John Wall]

Hi JL,
Thanks for the information on the length variation. You're lucky to have handled a few of these. In all the years I've collected Mausers, I've never seen an M1954, and only knew them from gun book pictures and the description in Jim Hughes' book. It's interesting to learn at this late date that all this is likely bogus. I guess that shows you how few M1954's are floating around!
Best Regards,
John

 

[RP]

Glad to hear I wasn't the only one. I was quite angry with myeself for a while there. Very exciting to here about the book. Wish I had it a few weeks ago...;-) Great stuff and can't wait to see it. Regarding the quality of this example, it is exceptionally well made. This is the first Mexican rifle in my collection and was surprised with the condition, fit, finish etc. Not what I expected from what little I've read on how they (mexican variants of any kind) are typically found.

RP

 

[mosin46]

book

john,will there be,maybe, a notice when the above mentioned book comes out? should be one to have.

 

[John Wall]

Mexican arms book

Hi Mosin46,
The book on Mexican weapons by Hughes (James B. Hughes Jr.) has actually been around for almost 40 years. I believe that it is still available. Its title is "Mexican Military Arms, the Cartridge Period, 1866-1967". It appears to have been privately published in Houston Texas, and does not have an IBNS number. It is a paperback with 136 pages, and is still, after all these years, the only reference work in English devoted to Mexican military firearms. In the past 40 years, a lot of information on Mexican Mausers has popped up randomly, so we know that the Mauser information has flaws, particularly in the 1907-1920 time frame, but it is still an excellent book nonetheless.

RP, I recommend finding a copy of the book, but, like me, you may find the section on the M1954 confusing and misleading. Hughes states that many M1954's have receivers dating from as early as the late 1940's...a puzzle that is never explained in the text, other than by a remark that the receivers may have been "re-manufactured". He then goes on to say that the M1954 has an 03A3 rear sight, stamped triggerguard, and a plywood-like laminated buttstock, of the type pictured on page 528 in Smith and Smith's "Book of Rifles". Note that this book was published three years before Hughes' book in 1965, and perhaps was one of Hughes' sources. Interestingly, the Smiths' probably never saw one of these rifles close-up either. They say that the M1954 is over 5 inches longer than the M1936. JL, is this accurate?

The M1954 made with the Mexican Navy crest is not mentioned at all.
Regards,
John

 

[JL]

Hi Mosin46,
The book on Mexican weapons by Hughes (James B. Hughes Jr.) has actually been around for almost 40 years. I believe that it is still available. Its title is "Mexican Military Arms, the Cartridge Period, 1866-1967". It appears to have been privately published in Houston Texas, and does not have an IBNS number. It is a paperback with 136 pages, and is still, after all these years, the only reference work in English devoted to Mexican military firearms. In the past 40 years, a lot of information on Mexican Mausers has popped up randomly, so we know that the Mauser information has flaws, particularly in the 1907-1920 time frame, but it is still an excellent book nonetheless.

RP, I recommend finding a copy of the book, but, like me, you may find the section on the M1954 confusing and misleading. Hughes states that many M1954's have receivers dating from as early as the late 1940's...a puzzle that is never explained in the text, other than by a remark that the receivers may have been "re-manufactured". He then goes on to say that the M1954 has an 03A3 rear sight, stamped triggerguard, and a plywood-like laminated buttstock, of the type pictured on page 528 in Smith and Smith's "Book of Rifles". Note that this book was published three years before Hughes' book in 1965, and perhaps was one of Hughes' sources. Interestingly, the Smiths probably never saw on of these rifles close-up either. They say that the M1954 is over 5 inches longer than the M1936. JL, is this accurate?

The M1954 made with the Mexican Navy crest is not mentioned at all.
Regards,
John

My '54 is sitting by two '36s. The muzzle of the '36s reach almost to the front of the sight base on the '54. The rear bands line up and the '36 front end of the front band is in the middle of the '54 front band. About an inch difference added between the bands. JL

 

[Louie]

36 Mex Rifle

Just came back from Mexico City, and saw tons of these rifles being carried by Military School cadets from Army and Navy. Reg. guys had G3s M16s, HK Bullpups, and Congo FALs. The cadets all had these Mauser rifles though.

 

[Xela]

Hughes book

Hi Mosin46,
The book on Mexican weapons by Hughes (James B. Hughes Jr.) has actually been around for almost 40 years. I believe that it is still available. Its title is "Mexican Military Arms, the Cartridge Period, 1866-1967". It appears to have been privately published in Houston Texas, and does not have an IBNS number. It is a paperback with 136 pages, and is still, after all these years, the only reference work in English devoted to Mexican military firearms. In the past 40 years, a lot of information on Mexican Mausers has popped up randomly, so we know that the Mauser information has flaws, particularly in the 1907-1920 time frame, but it is still an excellent book nonetheless.

RP, I recommend finding a copy of the book, but, like me, you may find the section on the M1954 confusing and misleading. Hughes states that many M1954's have receivers dating from as early as the late 1940's...a puzzle that is never explained in the text, other than by a remark that the receivers may have been "re-manufactured". He then goes on to say that the M1954 has an 03A3 rear sight, stamped triggerguard, and a plywood-like laminated buttstock, of the type pictured on page 528 in Smith and Smith's "Book of Rifles". Note that this book was published three years before Hughes' book in 1965, and perhaps was one of Hughes' sources. Interestingly, the Smiths probably never saw on of these rifles close-up either. They say that the M1954 is over 5 inches longer than the M1936. JL, is this accurate?

The M1954 made with the Mexican Navy crest is not mentioned at all.
Regards,
John

Hughes book is a great resource even after all these years and including some of its quirks.

I got my Hughes book from these guys in 2003 for about 35 bucks:
http://www.collectorsfirearms.com/admin/show_inventory.php?catID=10&subcatID=101

Now they're going for 75!!! Last I checked (couple of years now, they had a couple of dozen books left.

Xela

 

[WA9BYR]

Beautiful

Your Mexican Mauser is a treasure.

I have seen a few in new condition. They were in museums. The Carranza museum on Rio Lerma (I believe), Mexico City, just down the street from the UK embassy has a terrific collection on display. Many revolution era rifles are in new or as-new condition.

I asked the guard if I could take one out for the day to see how accurate it was. We had a good laugh and he said I would be more likely to borrow the Mexican made Maxim..................no chance.

It's a great museum, Carranza's last home and almost no visitors. I recommend it for Mexican arms buffs.

My compliments on your rifle.

 

[ABMausers]

Far be it from me to disagree with John Wall, but his message prompted me to compare the Model 1936 and Model 1954 in my collection.

In his reply to RP, John stated: "Looking at your rifle, I was struck at how much it looks like the M.1936. It would appear that aside fom lengthing the receiver to accomodate the long .30-06 round, that it is just about the duplicate of the 7 mm M1936. I was surprised to see this given the prevailing concept of the M1954 as a rifle with a stamped triggerguard assembly, 03A3 Springfield-type rear sight and a laminated stock."

I may be misinterpreting what John means by "lengthening the receiver", and apologize in advance if I am. However, my two rifles have small-ring receivers of the same length (screw to screw). The differences are that the M1954 has a shorter receiver ring (1.10") than the M1936 (1.25"). This means that the opening in the top of the M1954 action is longer, to permit handling of the .30-06 cartridge. The magazine box and floorplate of the M1954 are correspondingly longer as well.

I agree with John that the description of the "stamped triggerguard, and a plywood-like laminated buttstock" as given by Hughes is inaccurate. This error is repeated by Ball in the 4th edition of "Military Mausers of the World" - he must have obtained his information from the sources that John mentioned. My M1954 has a milled triggerguard and floorplate and a solid wood stock.

 

[Xela]

Recycled 1936's

As an added note, Hughes states prior to describing the features of the 1954 (plywood, stamped trigger guards),

"These rifles are on the Mauser pattern and appear to be built on salvaged, surplus, or re-manufactured M-1936 receivers. Most receivers bear dates earlier than the model of the rifle would indicate, such as 1948."

I would think this may suggest that several patterns or variations may exist during the transition from one model to the next.

Just a thought,

Xela

 

[John Wall]

Far be it from me to disagree with John Wall, but his message prompted me to compare the Model 1936 and Model 1954 in my collection.

In his reply to RP, John stated: "Looking at your rifle, I was struck at how much it looks like the M.1936. It would appear that aside fom lengthing the receiver to accomodate the long .30-06 round, that it is just about the duplicate of the 7 mm M1936. I was surprised to see this given the prevailing concept of the M1954 as a rifle with a stamped triggerguard assembly, 03A3 Springfield-type rear sight and a laminated stock."

I may be misinterpreting what John means by "lengthening the receiver", and apologize in advance if I am. However, my two rifles have small-ring receivers of the same length (screw to screw). The differences are that the M1954 has a shorter receiver ring (1.10") than the M1936 (1.25"). This means that the opening in the top of the M1954 action is longer, to permit handling of the .30-06 cartridge. The magazine box and floorplate of the M1954 are correspondingly longer as well.

I agree with John that the description of the "stamped triggerguard, and a plywood-like laminated buttstock" as given by Hughes is inaccurate. This error is repeated by Ball in the 4th edition of "Military Mausers of the World" - he must have obtained his information from the sources that John mentioned. My M1954 has a milled triggerguard and floorplate and a solid wood stock.

Hi AB,
Many thanks for correcting my mistaken statement on the receiver length of the M1936 and the M1954. You are correct. The receiver lengths are indeed the same. Lesson learned again to recheck facts and not rely on old assumptions and memory!

Regarding the design of the M1954, the error appears to have begun with the 1955 edition of W. H. B. Smith's "Small Arms of the World". If you go to pages 592 and 593, you will find a detailed description of the M.1954 with four photos of the rifle and receiver (dated 1948!) and its bayonet and scabbard.

The belief that this was the true M1954 was picked up by Ludwig Olson who published the 03-A3 sight/stamped parts/laminated stock misinformation two years later in the (1957) second edition of "Mauser Bolt Rifles", (MBR) published by Fred Datig, FADCO, in Beverly Hills CA. The same error and the same photo of the same M.1954 has been carried over into the 3rd Edition of MBR published by Brownell's through all 15 printings.

Having stood the test of time, John Walter copied the same information in "Rifles of the World". Bob Ball then used both "Rifles of the World" and MBR as his sources. Finally, in the latest editions of Ball, Olson and Walter, they all cite each other as sources, sort of creating interlocking fields of fire to protect 50 year old misinformation.
Best Regards,
John

 

[John Wall]

As an added note, Hughes states prior to describing the features of the 1954 (plywood, stamped trigger guards),

"These rifles are on the Mauser pattern and appear to be built on salvaged, surplus, or re-manufactured M-1936 receivers. Most receivers bear dates earlier than the model of the rifle would indicate, such as 1948."

I would think this may suggest that several patterns or variations may exist during the transition from one model to the next.

Just a thought,

Xela

Hi Xela,
Just a guess, but I suspect that Jim Hughes was looking at page 593 of the 1955 edition of W. H. B. Smith's "Small Arms of the World" when he wrote that. At the top of the page, there is a photo of the M.1954 receiver, which is clearly dated "1948".

I wonder if this is a trial version of the M1954 or if several variations were made?
Regards,
John

 

[sakorick]

Beautiful rifle and great shooting....I assume 100 yards?? Regards, Rick.

 

[Ike27]

Actually.. I scooped that rifle up from RP a while back..

 

[Fatherandersonthepaladin]

That educational moment reminded me of my SVT's cleaning rod... took me a couple days to find out how to eject the cleaning rod... I thought the lug inside the stock (which I didn't know doesn't exist) had gotten knocked loose and was turning with the rod itself. Then I pressed the button on the bayonet lug and out came the rod.

 

[Betonfahrer]

I had a Mexican 1954 I got from Jan Gardiner.It has the 03A3 rear receiver sight and the hand guard had a piece of wood filled in where the "1936" rear sight would have been.The stock was not laminated,but the wood had a lot of stripes in it for lack of a better word.It may seem laminated in a picture.I sold it when I was laid off in 1991 It was almost brand new.I cannot remember the date on the receiver ring,but it was before 1954.I was able however to keep the 1936 Mexican rifle I also bought from him,Both have/had 99% blue.Along with the 1954 is the Brazil Mq-969 .308 rifle that I also was able to buy from Gardiners collection.Oh well I couldnt keep everything.