Mauser ID....what exactly is this?
1 - 18 of 18 Posts
Joined
·
3,117 Posts
They have to notch the receiver for 30.06?
..
..
Joined
·
14,019 Posts
I have one, but you can't have it. :tisk:
Joined
·
14,019 Posts
Yes.
On my Colombian FAMAGE job (originally a 7mm of Belgian make), they had to notch the receiver as in the above pictures (but just a little deeper than in these pictures, though),
They also apparently had to 'root out' the magazine well a bit to make enough extra room to make the .30-06 fit. Not enough to need changing the inletting, but the box fits tight in the wood and you can tell the magazine box had to be bulged a bit.
Joined
·
3,456 Posts
Hi ARG,
Belgian Army literature refer to your rifle as the "Mle 1924". There is no such model designation as the Model 1950 in FN military bolt rifles..except on this Forum and in the 1960's Ye Old Hunter ads in the "American Rifleman".
The "B" on the receiver ring stands for Baudouin, the King of Belgium.
See pages 37 and 45 in "Mauser Military Rifles of the World", 5th edition. Army rifles should have a black enamel finish, while Navy rifles had a gray parkerized surface.
Regards,
John
Belgian Army literature refer to your rifle as the "Mle 1924". There is no such model designation as the Model 1950 in FN military bolt rifles..except on this Forum and in the 1960's Ye Old Hunter ads in the "American Rifleman".
The "B" on the receiver ring stands for Baudouin, the King of Belgium.
See pages 37 and 45 in "Mauser Military Rifles of the World", 5th edition. Army rifles should have a black enamel finish, while Navy rifles had a gray parkerized surface.
Regards,
John
Even though Belgian "Army" literature may indicate "M1924, this is incorrect. The FN M1924 rifle had an intermediate length receiver and bolt ( as in the FN inspired Yugoslav M24, M24/47 and M48 series of rifles.)
In 1930, FN made a "Normal length " Mauser action, as in the Gew/Kar 98 receiver dimenstions ("Standard Length") and the "Model 1924" was discontinued by the mid 1930s.
IN 1948-50, improvements to Machining the receiver led to the production of the "double broached Bolt ways" receiver, for all Post-WW II "M1930s" These have been known thru collectors circles as either "M1930/50, or simply M1950".
The "M1950" design was produced initially in 7,9mm for the Dutch and the Israeli Defence Forces ( 1948-50)--- and then for Colombia (1950) Morocco as the Gendarmerie Carbine ( 1950-60) and the Belgian Army and Navy ("ABL"); the Duchy of Luxembourg ("AL"); and the Belgian Congo Force Publique ("FP"). These Latter rifles were all factory made in .30/06.
NO other calibres were made, although a special batch of these actions in 1952 were set up as Target Rifles for Venezuela for the Pan-American Rifle Comps, in 7mm Mauser ( 26 inch barrels, and Windage adjustable rear sights...only a few 100s prepared.
Last of the Regular Factory produced "Mausers"...unless one counts the ZCZ (Zastava, Kragujevac) "M63 "Tanker" Commercial Model for both Euro sales and a certain US distributor of "Humped and Bubbaed" Mausers. The "M63" is based on the M24 Intermediate action...a nice fake, but still a fake.
Regards,
Doc AV
In 1930, FN made a "Normal length " Mauser action, as in the Gew/Kar 98 receiver dimenstions ("Standard Length") and the "Model 1924" was discontinued by the mid 1930s.
IN 1948-50, improvements to Machining the receiver led to the production of the "double broached Bolt ways" receiver, for all Post-WW II "M1930s" These have been known thru collectors circles as either "M1930/50, or simply M1950".
The "M1950" design was produced initially in 7,9mm for the Dutch and the Israeli Defence Forces ( 1948-50)--- and then for Colombia (1950) Morocco as the Gendarmerie Carbine ( 1950-60) and the Belgian Army and Navy ("ABL"); the Duchy of Luxembourg ("AL"); and the Belgian Congo Force Publique ("FP"). These Latter rifles were all factory made in .30/06.
NO other calibres were made, although a special batch of these actions in 1952 were set up as Target Rifles for Venezuela for the Pan-American Rifle Comps, in 7mm Mauser ( 26 inch barrels, and Windage adjustable rear sights...only a few 100s prepared.
Last of the Regular Factory produced "Mausers"...unless one counts the ZCZ (Zastava, Kragujevac) "M63 "Tanker" Commercial Model for both Euro sales and a certain US distributor of "Humped and Bubbaed" Mausers. The "M63" is based on the M24 Intermediate action...a nice fake, but still a fake.
Regards,
Doc AV
Joined
·
16,247 Posts
ARG,
FN model designations can be confusing. As John says, FN1950 is a collector label for post war FN1930 rifles which are double broach cut. The FN1930 and "FN1950" are standard length actions while the FN1924 is an intermediate length (shorter) action. Sometimes you may see FN24/30 which means FN1930.
Then to really confuse things, the Belgian Army called their FN1950 (post war FN1930) rifles "Mle 1924".
To cut through all this, collectors usually refer to FN Mauser rifles as FN1922, FN1924, FN1930, or FN1950.
FN model designations can be confusing. As John says, FN1950 is a collector label for post war FN1930 rifles which are double broach cut. The FN1930 and "FN1950" are standard length actions while the FN1924 is an intermediate length (shorter) action. Sometimes you may see FN24/30 which means FN1930.
Then to really confuse things, the Belgian Army called their FN1950 (post war FN1930) rifles "Mle 1924".
To cut through all this, collectors usually refer to FN Mauser rifles as FN1922, FN1924, FN1930, or FN1950.
Joined
·
16,247 Posts
Interestingly enough, although page 42 indicates Bob has not yet figured out the difference between the FN1924 and FN1930, he does "recognize" the FN1950 label on page 36.
Regards,
Bill
Joined
·
3,456 Posts
Hi Bill,
Yes, there are many inconsistencies and mistakes in MMRotW which have persisted since it first appeared in the 1980's. No doubt it could use a thorough technical review. However, as long as sales stay healthy, the publishers don't seem to want to make the investment. Updating the discrete technical content of a 448 page book which tries to cover a field as broad as military Mausers is a lengthy and time-consuming undertaking and expensive to boot. (And it's not a one man job!) I can think of 20 different military rifle books the have been printed over the past 50 years that appear to have been abandoned by their publishers, if they still exist. Yet we still buy them and accept their data often without question.
Regards,
John
Joined
·
16,247 Posts
Hi John,
You know Bob and I don't, and I'm sure you understand the overall situation with MMRW much better than I do. Still, if I were writing the "bible" on military Mausers, I would solicit help from knowledgeable collectors and make every effort to update the text as much as possible through each of the four revisions. I don't doubt that you would do the same if you were the author. You are of course correct that to do a complete technical review and rewrite of the fifth edition now would be a monumental task that is not likely to happen.
MMRW has its flaws but it is still the best (and almost the only) overall military Mauser rifle book out there.
Regards,
Bill
The same thing could be said of SAOTW by Smith & Smith, Ed.Ezell...over the years (My first SAOTW was back in the late 1960s), the Mistakes (understandable) and unreliable info ( not enough background) became "set in concrete" to such an extent that by the time it was reviewed and expanded by Ezell in the 1980s, the initial part of the book was left "untouched" as if it was the "Holy Word" and un-touchable.
Of course, with the Internet, The fall of "The Wall" and all the new sources of Milsurp since the Halcyon days of Interarms etc, there is enough new ( and correctly attributed) information to make TWO new SAOTW books, just on the "Pre-1950s" rifles etc. I suppose a "general SAOTW book would run to a couple of volumes, ( say pre-1960 and post-1960), to at least separate the Bolt actions etc from the later Full Autos....
And MMROTW has tried to do this with Mauser designs alone. And good on it...the photos are a great help, even if there are still some omissions and mistakes...even after 5 editions.
Anyway, I am too old to sit down and Revise SAOTW or any other "Bible"....It could take me full-time about 10 years, even with Full Internet-Imaging and Connectivity to other collectors etc. I just like to look in my Collection or my Memories and say..."I Have/Had an example omitted in SAOTW " or "I have a Mauser which MMROTW got wrong in attribution". MY Turkish collection is a case in point....
Regards,
Doc AV
AV Ballistics.
Of course, with the Internet, The fall of "The Wall" and all the new sources of Milsurp since the Halcyon days of Interarms etc, there is enough new ( and correctly attributed) information to make TWO new SAOTW books, just on the "Pre-1950s" rifles etc. I suppose a "general SAOTW book would run to a couple of volumes, ( say pre-1960 and post-1960), to at least separate the Bolt actions etc from the later Full Autos....
And MMROTW has tried to do this with Mauser designs alone. And good on it...the photos are a great help, even if there are still some omissions and mistakes...even after 5 editions.
Anyway, I am too old to sit down and Revise SAOTW or any other "Bible"....It could take me full-time about 10 years, even with Full Internet-Imaging and Connectivity to other collectors etc. I just like to look in my Collection or my Memories and say..."I Have/Had an example omitted in SAOTW " or "I have a Mauser which MMROTW got wrong in attribution". MY Turkish collection is a case in point....
Regards,
Doc AV
AV Ballistics.
Joined
·
7,675 Posts
Even the few Turks and Yugoslav rebuilds I have snagged show that MMROTW is not 100% correct. But the time, effort and money needed to revise it are beyond most of us, but at least I'll know what would keep me busy if I ever hit the lottery and quit work.
1 - 18 of 18 Posts
