So, let me be clear ,any mount that Finnbear HAD sold, is with out a douht ,a fake ! And there is no one in the U.S. that can look at a mount and tell the owner of it that it is real.
It's impossible to see\track and analyze all mounts that he had sold, so I don't (and have no right) state this. But all that were posted here, at Gunboards, and at other boards - yes.
I hope many guys read linked threads, make their own conclusions, and now see the difference
Mike Radford thinks. in his opinioin. ...... and if there are any real ones he has never seen one!
I also write the same at one of the linked threads. I mean that at that moment I don't saw at least one at any board or auction.
I doesn't mean that they don't exist. Key words are "
I" and
"at that moment". I, and Mike also, can't know everything.
But currently I must update this statement - recently I saw one bringback mount.
http://www.warrelics.eu/forum/equipment-accessories-and-personal-items/mosin-nagant-scopes-21916/
And here is 1/2 of SVT mount (with cutted bottom)
http://forums.gunboards.com/showthread.php?252608-Odd-Russian-Sniper-Scope-Mount-what-is-it
Mount 3 WHICH only a very select few in the Russian advanced collector group can say for sure is beyond any question real at $2,000.00 and up
Nothing strange that ex-ussr collectors have their own opinion at this area as they have very valuable advantages - a possibility to analyze mounts in museums, relic mount founded at battle fields. And quantity of such mounts is enough to make conclusions - all mounts in museums, relic and attic founded are that type that you called 3.
And not only russian collectors own original mounts. I saw them all over Europe - Ukraine, Hungary, Poland, Austria, Latvia, Germany, etc., at online auction also.
Just a few links, that I was able to find quickly, as I don't save them
http://www.hermann-historica.de/auktion/hhm59.pl?f=NR_LOT&c=2574&t=temartic_S_GB&db=kat59_s.txt
http://www.wehrmacht-awards.com/forums/showthread.php?t=561080
WHEN I compare my Finnbear mount to your posted picture it is the same so can I now download your post and use it to confirm that my mount is real.
I'm not a final instance, and I'm not a person who discovered facts posted above.
Let's be fair, we must say "Thank you" to Molosky, СН, and other guys - and I just support facts that they discovered, and add something new based on their results.
Now to curves - I already said that this is not enough.
Why I decided to show this difference, not another? Because it is located outside, it's is very easy to see it, and to see others, you must look inside, unscrew recoil buffer, measure screw threading, etc. I also must say, illustrated difference is not the only difference in curves outside.
Even different Finnbear's mounts have different angle circularity. But USUALLY most of them have curves as at the picture above. And below I post picture of, I think, updated mount, with another curves, which are very close to original.
If curves at discussed area are identical to original mount, you must analyze this mount more detailed.
Why? I think everybody who have 2 hands, 30 minutes of free time, correct instruments and know what he is doing, could correct curves, and they will look very close to original.
Difference in curves, that I posted, is just one of many other differences. I can't say, which of them is the main, all of them are important. To make final conclusion, you must analyze ALL of them.
What exactly you must analyze? It is already posted here
Post #2 , #10, #33 below
http://forums.gunboards.com/showthread.php?207729-Did-forgers-win-this-game
Post #33 below
http://forums.gunboards.com/showthread.php?239571-Help-needed-to-identify-tokarov-rifle-sniper-scope
AS far as the so called experts that withhold information on how to identify fake items in order to prevent the forgers from making fakes is very short sighted. Belive me the forgers are ahead of you and the only people who are harmed is the average collector who purchases a item in good faith and then later is told BY THE expert you had been taken. One of reasons to make use of the fourm is to share the members knowledge between each other and allow each member to grow their knowledge base making them a better collector and consumer. I wonder if we are meeting that goal ?
In something I agree with you, in something I disagree.
If you want to know, original mount or not, there are 2 ways - ask collectors community opinion, or define this by yourself.
If you want to do it by yourself, it will be more useful, when you will note some facts by yourself and will have your own opinion, than simply quote somebody's post. Direction where you must to look was already set by this and linked threads. It's not easy - to get this knowledge you must analyze all available information.
Such situation is typical for all areas of collecting - you must deeply research area, before you can make your own correct conclusions, when you are buying rare expensive items. It's the true of our times....
Each collector has it's own secrets. If you don't ready and not sure - ask others.
And nobody withhold information about SVT mounts, everything necessary is already posted.
I think many wish a detailed illustrated manual "how to identify original mount".
But I won't do it...
Why?
Just a simple example - I already see many quotes from my thread related to
PU scopes on other websites, auctions, and some of them are distorted. Somebody just read it, and post quotes without understanding of whole area. And when some facts are quoted out of context, they loose their meaning
I begun to think that such information is not for everybody.
P.S. sorry for possible mistakes in grammar, post is very long