Third Party Press

Mitchell’s Mausers questions

Gerst

Gerst

Senior Member
I have seen several Mitchell rifles at auction. They all seem to be matching. Are the original numbers scrubbed and new, matching numbers applied or were any of the original numbers retained? I suppose that capture rifles of all types were used.
 
So I don't know nor do I pretend to know. There are guys here who 100% know. Wanted to post on an earlier thread but I'll put it here anyway and add it later. Those 'clockers' or data logggers whichever or whatever you'd rather be know as... They'll chime in with photos and details of an auction that happened xx years ago. Amazing. Really hard to get one past these guys.
 
From my understanding they were Russian capture rifles that were scrubbed and had markings added or removed depending on his value adding purpose. They either came from Ukraine, Russia, and I would assume the balkans for how close he seems to be with Serbia. Some will know much more
 
So I'll addd this. Stripped down to barrelled action and visually checked for bore/chamber indications. From my small sample size they chose really nice bore conditioon.
 
Gerst said:
So they ground off the old numbers add added new ones. That makes them fraudulent rifles, doesn’t it?
Pathetic.
Click to expand...

Yes indeed. They are forgeries. Counterfeits. Not original. Not cool considering the rifles would have sold here without any alterations.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
The guys that refurbed them did their damnedest to duplicate a Yugo M48, which makes sense because that’s all that Mitchell’s was selling for years.
 
bill grist said:
Nothing but $hit. Shaming the unknowledge populace that look for a 98k. BILL
Click to expand...

No I don’t mean to shame the people that bought them at all, they don’t know that there is anything wrong or not authentic about the gun(s) they bought. If anyone should be shamed it’s Mitchell’s themselves for not advertising exactly what was done to the guns.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Them and all the gun magazines that allowed them to publish ads of their questionable wears and in some cases shill for their product.
 
lack of site research and use of site resources, why do you all bother to answer such a elementary questions
 
sprat said:
lack of site research and use of site resources, why do you all bother to answer such a elementary questions
Click to expand...

Very bluntly stated, but I tend to side with this statement. We’ve said it before, it literally takes one google search and about 20-30 seconds to see exactly what Mitchell’s are. If the market decides to forego such simple research, that’s their own fault.
 
New collectors can be forgiven, as there's the excitement of spotting a 98k regardless of what it is.
BUT that doesn't explain the folks that back what Mitchell's is.
That is the mystery, especially considering the vast resources available.
 
moconfed said:
New collectors can be forgiven, as there's the excitement of spotting a 98k regardless of what it is.
BUT that doesn't explain the folks that back what Mitchell's is.
That is the mystery, especially considering the vast resources available.
Click to expand...

I suppose a lot of new people just see a K98k pattern rifle with dirty birds, and ask no further questions.
 
I can recall, long before I even thought about collecting, being 12 or 13 years old sitting in a doctor’s office awaiting my wellness check reading an advert for Mitchell’s in a gun magazine (back when it was okay to still have those in public...). Even then, I can recall thinking there’s no way that could be, in such mass quantities of perfect condition. That was 13 year old me, 13 years ago.
 
As a cheap shooter [ which they no longer are ] they are fine, but as a collector item, they are, and always have been, worthless.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Military Rifle Journal
Back
Top