- 1891 Argentine Mauser Serial Numbers
- Swedish Mauser Production Numbers
- 1896 Swedish Mauser Serial Numbers
Hi Reg, You will certainly love the Swedish Mauser. Anther really cool thing about them is their bayonets. The design IMO was drastically way ahead of it’s time and much more well made than any other bayonets out there. I plan on doing a video of them to give some more detail that what I wrote. If you can find a Swedish Mauser with matching numbers, that will be better in the long run. Even if you have to pay a little more up front.
Mine doesn’t have all matching numbers, but the ones that do will be worth more later on. I look at each older gun I get as an investment, at least that is what I tell my soon to be wife. ? I am going to a gun show this coming weekend and am in the market for an Enfield No 1 Mark III Lothgow. We will see if I find one. Love the history of all these weapons.
I am considering buying a M38 I have seen in a local gunshop. It is a Carl Gustafs with a 1916 date on the receiver and a 643,XXX serial number. It has a bent bolt with matching last three serial numbers. The numbers on the other parts also match. Everything looks good, except there are a couple of things I don't understand. I can’t reconcile the date with the SN. I’ve read posts indicating people know from a serial number, when it was made, but I cannot find the entire list and it seems a 1916 CG should be a much lower number.
Since it is a CG, which I understand indicates it was originally an M96, is it possible the bent bolt with matching number is the original? Thanks, I’d appreciate any insights you can give me.
All M96s were originally made with straight bolt handles. 1916 CG production ran from 371495 to 401598. An M38 with number 643xxx, made by Carl Gustaf, should be a rebuild of an M96. P.82 of 'Crown Jewels' by Dana Jones shows photos of a rifle similar to the one you describe.
That rifle has a bent bolt handle, serial No. 657xxx and is dated to 1935.
So the only anomaly in your description is the 1916 date. But, reading 'between the lines' in the CG literature, I observe a certain vagueness as to what was re-used, what was made new, and what may have been remarked. Factories often worked quite pragmatically with what they found in the spares bins. One must avoid binary statements like 'always/never' when considering such recycling activities, and not fall into the collector's self-imposed trap of only regarding one unique configuration as 'correct' and thus acceptable. Perhaps you could post a good close-up photo of the receiver marking? I went back and took another look. Here are two pictures.
One of the date and one with the serial number. The date stamped on the receiver is 1916. The serial number, however, is overstamped. You can see other numbers underneath the 643281.
All the parts that have SNs on them have 281. Anybody know what's happening here? Did the Swedes overstamp SNs when they cut down M96s into M38s?
Did they then apply matching parts to the receiver? Not all the parts have SNs. Trigger guard and butt plate do not have SNs.
Gazab ka hai din Socho zara Ye diwanapan dekho zara Tum ho akele, hum bhi akele, maza aa raha hai Kasam se Dekh lo Hum ko kareeb se Aaj hum Mile hain naseeb se Ye pal fir kahaan Aur ye manzil fir kahaan Gazab ka hai din Socho zara Ye diwanapan dekho zara Tum ho akele, hum bhi akele, maza aa raha hai Kasam se Kya kahoon Mera jo haal hai Raat din tumhara khayaal hai Fir bhi jaane jaan, main kahaan aur tum kahaan Gazab ka hai din Socho zara Ye diwanapan dekho zara Tum ho akele, hum bhi akele, maza aa raha hai Kasam se credits. Download song gazab ka hai din socho zara.
I did not find one on the barrel, but may not have looked in the right place. Thanks for your help.
. This article is within the scope of, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the and see a list of. This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's. This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's. (Rated Start-Class) This article is within the scope of the. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a.
To use this banner, please see the. This article has been as Start-Class on the. Additional information. Rune factory tides of destiny wii iso undub.
This article has been checked against the following:. Referencing and citation: not checked. Coverage and accuracy: not checked. Structure: not checked. Grammar: not checked. Supporting materials: not checked To fill out this checklist, please the following to the template call: B1 
Hi All, I've been a member for a while, but this is one of my first posts. I am interested in learning anyone's experience with the M1896 vs. M1938 Swedish Mauser. I really like these old rifles, and I already have a hunting rifle chambered in the 6.5x55mm cal. Does anyone have an M96 or an M38 military Mauser?
Which do you prefer? I'm leaning toward the long 'smoke pole' M96 with the straight bolt handle. Still, the M38 looks a little less clumsy.
Maybe I'm missing the point - clumsy might be the new cool. I plan to shoot at 100 yards mostly, but if I could get out to a 300 yard range I'd be all about it. Anyone's experience would be appreciated. Stripped and sporterized both. Nah, actually that last comment was just to make the purists sweat a little. I've had both guns, although both had clipped military stocks when I got them.
They are good guns, same action. The bent bolt is nice, but not critically better than the straight to me. Love the caliber. Still have both guns, they're just waiting for barrels (will still be 6.5x55 when I'm done). In my experience, the M38 are a little harder to find and may bring more of a premium, so just a standard 96 might be a good start. I have a three-digit m/96 Carl Gustaf made in 1898 and would not swap it for an m/38. I shoot both the 140gr and 123gr bullets with some pretty good accuracy, but then I have an inter-war after market peepsight fitted to it.
Called the 'Wehrmann' sight, it simply fits on the bolt removal latch using a longer locating screw, and also folds down flat if you wish to use the original iron sights. They are, I'm told, quite rare, but mine was only a couple hundred bucks at a gun show, and the vendor had three of them. The low recoil and shoot-all-day comfort of these lovely old rifles and carbines makes them a joy to shoot on the range, or out in the field. You can see it being shot on Youtube - tac's guns - Swedish Mauser tac. Hi All, I've been a member for a while, but this is one of my first posts. I am interested in learning anyone's experience with the M1896 vs. M1938 Swedish Mauser.
1891 Argentine Mauser Serial Numbers
I really like these old rifles, and I already have a hunting rifle chambered in the 6.5x55mm cal. Does anyone have an M96 or an M38 military Mauser? Which do you prefer? I'm leaning toward the long 'smoke pole' M96 with the straight bolt handle. Still, the M38 looks a little less clumsy. Maybe I'm missing the point - clumsy might be the new cool. I plan to shoot at 100 yards mostly, but if I could get out to a 300 yard range I'd be all about it.
Anyone's experience would be appreciated. Hi All, I've been a member for a while, but this is one of my first posts. I am interested in learning anyone's experience with the M1896 vs. M1938 Swedish Mauser. I really like these old rifles, and I already have a hunting rifle chambered in the 6.5x55mm cal.
Does anyone have an M96 or an M38 military Mauser? Which do you prefer? I'm leaning toward the long 'smoke pole' M96 with the straight bolt handle. Still, the M38 looks a little less clumsy.
Maybe I'm missing the point - clumsy might be the new cool. I plan to shoot at 100 yards mostly, but if I could get out to a 300 yard range I'd be all about it. Anyone's experience would be appreciated.
Click to expand.Well I don't have either of those guns, but thinking about the aspects you included in the description of those two rifles, the longer barreled gun will have a longer sight radius, comparative to the other gun. This, along with the powder's ability to have an effect on the bullet for a longer period of time, will affect accuracy in your favour.
The shorter gun, however, will make a better 'brush gun' for hunting, since less of the barrel will sit above the shoulder. When my dad got a sling for his Win. 94, he put the forward swivel just behind the front barrel band, so that the gun would sit lower on his shoulder and that completely eliminated the gun catching on overhead branches, which made walking through the woods infinitely easier. The shorter gun should also be a little bit lighter in weight, compared to the longer gun. Cutting down the stock will do a lot for losing weight, too. My brother cut the stock on his '95 and that gun is literally as light and handy as our 94's.
So, I guess the answer to your question is, how do you intend to use the gun? Hunting or competition? Thought I'd revive this thread.
Swedish Mauser Production Numbers
I picked up an M/96 over the weekend. Beautiful gun. Bolt, barrel, all in good condition, though the finish could use some touching up. And it's in a synthetic stock, which I may swap out some day for an old wood one if I find a decent one. The action is still tight and works fantastic. I can't wait to get some 6.5x55 so I can get this out to the range. Picked up a Type 99 Arisaka re-chambered to.30-06 too, it's a bit rougher overall, but should be fun to have in the collection.
1896 Swedish Mauser Serial Numbers
Both can use a little work and I'm looking forward to cleaning them up and getting them out to shoot. Hi All, I've been a member for a while, but this is one of my first posts. I am interested in learning anyone's experience with the M1896 vs. M1938 Swedish Mauser. I really like these old rifles, and I already have a hunting rifle chambered in the 6.5x55mm cal. Does anyone have an M96 or an M38 military Mauser?
Which do you prefer? I'm leaning toward the long 'smoke pole' M96 with the straight bolt handle. Still, the M38 looks a little less clumsy. Maybe I'm missing the point - clumsy might be the new cool. I plan to shoot at 100 yards mostly, but if I could get out to a 300 yard range I'd be all about it. Anyone's experience would be appreciated.
