Hi, guys,
Please bear with me a minute and let me explain my problem. I am fairly new to this site, though not to an interest in Mausers. But for many years I have been involved in looking at guns, with a view to identification and evaluation. One area of interest has been faked and enhanced markings and finish, whether on a reproduction Colt 1851 being passed off as original, or a "cut and weld" M1 rifle with new Parkerizing being advertised as "like new." In the past several weeks, I have seen on here and one other site a bunch of G.33/40 and G.24(t) rifles for which some folks have paid a considerable sum of money. Admittedly, my eyeballs are getting old, just like me, and I may not be as clear-sighted as I used to be, but something doesn't seem right with this. Obviously, if any item can gain considerable value because of some mark or other characteristic, unscrupulous people will alter it to have that characteristic. But something I have seen recently seems odd.
For one thing, a large number of G.33/40's turning up all at once seems odd. It is like someone "finding" a cache of Colt Patersons. It also seems odd that those rifles all have a marking different from those I have seen, and which appears to have been Pantographed. Now it is possible that the manufacturer in 1940 or whenever, used a Pantograph, but it would be very unusual when such markings were normally stamped deeply into the steel before it was hardened. And I suspect most of the folks here don't know how to tell the markings apart. Further, some of those markings have font characteristics not consistent with those I have seen or with pictures of known genuine markings. Of course, stories can easily be made up to explain any inconsistencies in the guns or in their sudden appearance. Still, having dozens of good condition 1940-vintage rare rifles suddenly turn up at high prices would seem at best unusual; at worst, mass-production fraud.
So my problem is that when/if I try to mention my concerns, persons more experienced in Mausers than I point out the error of my ways and insist that there is no problem and that I am ignorant, something I readily concede. Am I wrong? Should I keep quiet? If someone paid good money for a fake, is it really my business? If it isn't a fake, am I justified in casting doubt on a gun I have not actually seen?
Those are my thoughts. I would appreciate yours.
Jim
