Gunboards Forums banner
1 - 17 of 17 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,886 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
I am under the impression that the ejector housing or bolt stop on the ZAR Chilean will not have any mark on the ejector housing spring, while the 1895 Chilean will have a diamond shaped mark. Is that correct?

If I were to see the diamond shaped mark on the ejector housing spring of an otherwise legitimate looking ZAR Chilean, should I assume that the ejector housing assembly has been replaced?

Thanks.

Joe
 

Attachments

·
Platinum Bullet Member and Certified Curmudgeon
Joined
·
15,946 Posts
If I were to see the diamond shaped mark on the ejector housing spring of an otherwise legitimate looking ZAR Chilean, should I assume that the ejector housing assembly has been replaced?

Thanks.

Joe
That would seem to be the case. Since the parts are not numbered, they probably got switched when two or more rifles were taken apart close to each other.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,886 Posts
Discussion Starter · #4 ·
Thanks.
That confirms what i was thinking. Maybe the ejector broke and someone swapped it. Then again I doubt they considered the ZAR Mausers special back in Chile. So they probably did not care.
 

·
Platinum Bullet Member and Certified Curmudgeon
Joined
·
15,946 Posts
I don't think ejectors break very often. Probably it was just some soldiers cleaning their rifles for inspection and laying the parts on the same table.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,886 Posts
Discussion Starter · #6 ·
I looked through my pictures and was surprised to see several ZAR Chileans having the diamond mark on the ejector housing spring. I also saw several having that mark on the ring of the receiver that touches the barrel, i.e. between the crest and the barrel.

That "ring" between the receiver and the barrel is actually part of the receiver and not a separate part, right?

I can see swapping the ejector assembly, but if that mark between the receiver and barrel is actually on the receiver, it would seem that they must have done it when the crest was applied. I guess that would make sense if it is an acceptance mark, although seeing both with and without seems inconsistent.
 

·
Platinum Bullet Member and Certified Curmudgeon
Joined
·
15,946 Posts
That ring is the handguard retaining ring and is a separate part. It could have come from a Chilean rifle but I am not yet fully convinced that the diamond is a Chilean only marking. Or it could be a Chilean marking and still Loewe/DWM could have used some on the ZAR rifles. I have a Spanish SAW capture M1891 carbine that has some Turkish markings on some parts (left over from Turk M1890 rifles). Loewe/DWM is known to have used up leftover parts on later contracts. So possibly yes, the part is wrong for a ZAR rifle but it could be right because DWM put it there.

When you disassemble the rifle for total cleaning, push forward on the handguard retaining ring to remove it. It is a friction fit.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,408 Posts
I have also found that not all rifles exhibit 100% marking. Even if markings are typical, they are not always present. Even with matching numbers rifles, in excellent condition, there are sometimes examples where the marks are not present.
 

·
Platinum Bullet Member and Certified Curmudgeon
Joined
·
15,946 Posts
Original M95 ejector housings were unmarked. The diamond-shaped mark is an inspection stamp found on replacement parts made later by OEWG for the Chilean M95s.
Now that is a rare jewel of Mauser knowledge. If it is a Steyr marking, them Loewe/DWM did not put it on a rifle.

And from Backwoods, Virginia, no less.
;)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,886 Posts
Discussion Starter · #14 ·
Fal Grunt,

The ejector box with the diamond mark on the spring has a mark on the top. I don't think the ZAR/Chilean does. Also, today I saw an auction listing for an A-series Chilean that appeared to have an ejector box spring with no mark, supporting what MGMike said.

Here is the picture.
 

Attachments

·
Platinum Bullet Member
Joined
·
3,383 Posts
Well, I need to correct myself.

I ought to know better than to trust my recollections of 30-plus years ago, when I acquired, among other things from Chile, a pair of casket-sized crates of unsorted spare parts swept from the floors at the Arsenales de la Guerra in Santiago. There were parts for everything, some scrap, others brand new, for everything from Mauser 93s and 95s to SIG 510s. So yesterday I looked through some small boxes of parts I've kept over the years, and then examined a few Chilean rifles more carefully.

Conclusion: I was wrong when I wrote that original M95 ejector housings were unmarked; they are marked. See below.

I was only half-right regarding the diamond-shaped stamp (which actually looks more like a rectangular kite). It does appear on various M95 replacement parts made by OEWG at Steyr. But it also appears on some other parts made by Lowe. In fact there are a variety of marks appearing on a broad range of Chilean rifles from the Lowe M95 to the Steyr M12. These include a circle inside a triangle (two sizes, small and large), a female symbol with a dot inside the circle, a circle with crosshairs, an asterisk, a circle within a square, and of course the familiar crossed picks. Some of the parts made by OEWG --including front bands, front and rear sight bases, cocking pieces, bolts, bolt sleeves, extractors, even cleaning rods, additionally display those letters in a very tiny cluster. If there is a pattern to when and why the symbols were used it is indiscernible to me, but I am persuaded now that these symbols represent Chilean inspection or acceptance marks, and do not identify the manufacturer.

An all-matching C-series short rifle, Model 95/12 made by Lowe, has small circle-in-a-triangle stamps on the ejector housing, also on the ejector spring, as well as a third on the ejector blade. The same marks appear on the ejector of a Steyr M12 short rifle. Though the 95/12 looks original, I cannot be certain as it obviously went through an arsenal at least once to have the rear sight replaced, and the ejectors were apparently (judging from the number of broken ones) a high-mortality part in service.

I don't have a ZAR or OVS rifle at hand to examine, but it would not surprise me if they lack these marks. I did examine an M95 Chilean long rifle made by DWM, s/n 3; it does not display any of the marks I've described above.

M
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,647 Posts
from my experience:
my two 'original' Chile M95 (C-series SR and L-series LR) both have the diamond mark on the extractor and the handguard ring.
The L-series rifle has some handling marks, but is is all matching (incl. stock) and has the '1902' stock stamp --> doesn't look to be overhauled in an arsenal.
The C-series SR has more marks from use, stock is sanded, but still shows remnants of the (matching) stock serial # --> could be arsenal repaired.

My 3rd one is a ZAR Chile, serial # C1010, which doesn't have these diamond marks. Stock serial # and Chilean crest are crisp; doesn't show traces of arsenal repair. The ejector still has the fire blueing color. Unfortunately, the bolt (a Chilean M95 bolt) is mixed up. That one doesn't show any of the usual Chilean inspection marks (diamond, circle in triangle, crossed picks, cross in circle, cross above circle...). Only the rear sight base has a 'circle in triangle' stamp --> is changed to the Spitzer bullet

I've also got a Steyr made Chile 1912 (A series). This one doesn't have any 'diamond' marks at all, only the other typical Chile marks (circle in triangle, crossed picks, cross above circle...) --> i doubt that the diamond is a Steyr mark.

pics:
extractor: L-series LR 1902 with 'circle in triangle' on top and 'diamond' on spring


extractor: ZAR Chile: no marks at all (pics are with flash, so more rust visible than in natural light)


handguard ring: top is ZAR Chile, bottom L-series with diamond mark


From my impression: could be, that this diamond mark was an original Loewe/DWM inspection mark on several parts. Like the Argys, the Chileans could have used several marks for inspection of parts. And since Chile tried to copy the Prussian (German) army at that time, every single part needed to be inspected and stamped!
Different situation for the ZAR Mauser: the ZA Republic was at the brink of war, and needed guns desparately. No need to waste time with detailed stamping.

hope this is helpful, Chris
 
1 - 17 of 17 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top