Absolut
Senior Member
First of all, the correct designation for what is often referred as "objective mount" is in fact a Suhler Claw Mount which originally is called "Suhler Einhak-Montage" in German, abbreviated as "SEM". There are various types of Claw Mounts, but the Suhler Einhak-Montage can be identified by the fact that the catch/release is a sliding part in the rear base. Secondly, the term "objective mount" is misleading in that this mount can also be attached to other parts than the objective. The position of the soldered on scope rings is most often determined by where the bases on the rifle can be placed, and the eye distance the scope requires.
But to finally get to the topic: recently scrolling through local (meaning my country, but it isn't so large so for US dimensions it can be called local) ads for selling weapons I came across a listing for a Mauser 98 hunting rifle. The sportered rifle caught my attention for featuring SEM bases of a saddle type (which therefore do not weaken the receiver ring, since the dovetailed part sits on top of it). This also requires a higher rear scope base and a higher rear scope ring and usually results in the scope being a bit higher above the barrel line than being dovetailed directly into the receiver.
After a quick inspection of the rather very poor pictures I quickly noticed the saddle bases are very identical to the ones of Dave Roberts rifle. The bolt also appeared to be of the military pattern and the barrel still had the military steps and full length, while the open sights were sportered. The price was low (basically covering the parts costs), so I shot the seller a message. He then sold the rifle to me and I finally received it yesterday, not knowing precisely what I had bought.
Having it in hands, I did have some surprises. The bads were that none of the parts seemed to be matching numbers, the model designation on the receiver wall were scrubbed as the serial number on the receiver. The good thing however was that at least the mismatching bolt happened to be a good surprise in that it was a G.33/40 bolt of which I anyway had been in need for a rifle which recently was discovered on an attic, lacking its bolt (and funnily both are even in the same letter block). The second surprise was that a very closeby inspection unveiled that the scope bases both on bottom and front have a serial number on them - and this serial number matches the serial number inside the barrel channel of the heavily sportered stock (even the buttplate it sportered - but seemed to originate from the same military rifle since it still features the same WaA as on the receiver ring).
The absence of the serial number and the fact that many parts are mismatching (plus of course the scope bases covering the receiver ring) make it very hard to tell who originally made this rifle. Based on the WaA26 I believe I can make out on the right side of the receiver ring I am inclined to believe this rifle was originally made by BLM. Possibly someone more experienced with those can even give approx. year for it.
But to finally get to the topic: recently scrolling through local (meaning my country, but it isn't so large so for US dimensions it can be called local) ads for selling weapons I came across a listing for a Mauser 98 hunting rifle. The sportered rifle caught my attention for featuring SEM bases of a saddle type (which therefore do not weaken the receiver ring, since the dovetailed part sits on top of it). This also requires a higher rear scope base and a higher rear scope ring and usually results in the scope being a bit higher above the barrel line than being dovetailed directly into the receiver.
After a quick inspection of the rather very poor pictures I quickly noticed the saddle bases are very identical to the ones of Dave Roberts rifle. The bolt also appeared to be of the military pattern and the barrel still had the military steps and full length, while the open sights were sportered. The price was low (basically covering the parts costs), so I shot the seller a message. He then sold the rifle to me and I finally received it yesterday, not knowing precisely what I had bought.
Having it in hands, I did have some surprises. The bads were that none of the parts seemed to be matching numbers, the model designation on the receiver wall were scrubbed as the serial number on the receiver. The good thing however was that at least the mismatching bolt happened to be a good surprise in that it was a G.33/40 bolt of which I anyway had been in need for a rifle which recently was discovered on an attic, lacking its bolt (and funnily both are even in the same letter block). The second surprise was that a very closeby inspection unveiled that the scope bases both on bottom and front have a serial number on them - and this serial number matches the serial number inside the barrel channel of the heavily sportered stock (even the buttplate it sportered - but seemed to originate from the same military rifle since it still features the same WaA as on the receiver ring).
The absence of the serial number and the fact that many parts are mismatching (plus of course the scope bases covering the receiver ring) make it very hard to tell who originally made this rifle. Based on the WaA26 I believe I can make out on the right side of the receiver ring I am inclined to believe this rifle was originally made by BLM. Possibly someone more experienced with those can even give approx. year for it.
Attachments
-
IMG_4415.JPG261.2 KB · Views: 85
-
IMG_4416.jpg289.1 KB · Views: 101
-
IMG_4419.jpg294.7 KB · Views: 71
-
IMG_4420.jpg292.1 KB · Views: 61
-
IMG_4421.jpg288.9 KB · Views: 73
-
IMG_4422.jpg288.2 KB · Views: 95
-
IMG_4423.jpg286.7 KB · Views: 64
-
IMG_4426.jpg289 KB · Views: 65
-
IMG_4425.jpg274.1 KB · Views: 70
-
IMG_4432.jpg291 KB · Views: 65