Belgian MH.

They got up loaded when I resized the pics.
Managed to remove them.

OK the MH is a 577/450.
The front sight is different to the MH.
The rear sight is a replacement from a british MH.
The rear stock comb is a different profile to my british MH.
My wife and I both see the Belgian MH as being a little thinner / finer / delicate in shape.
It is about 15/20 grams lighter, and 5mm longer overall with barrel length within 1/2 mm the same.
The Belgian MH has a short lever
The front of the trigger guard is flared outwards as it meats the bottom of the block where the sling swivel fits.

Is there anything any one wants me to look at?

Patrick.
My other MH is a Nepalese one. Dated 1886. In very good shootable condition.
I have put about 50 rounds through it so far.
See pic.

That Belgian MH is great! I wish I had more than that, but sadly my knowledge of these Belgian variants is minimal right now, at best. I'm reading up on them as much as I can right now, but you have shown me one I've never seen before. I'd swear that was a Brit version from a distance. Really like it, thanks for showing!
While I'm thinking of it, I'm sure Patrick will know, are all Belgian MHs of the commercial variety? Or did they actually fill official military contracts? The very few Belgians I've seen were bought up by militias, 'private' forces, that type of thing. That's always been the speculation about the Muscats, that they were built for the Sultan of Oman's forces, guards, etc. Though I've found no concrete evidence to support this.

This rifle needs to be stripped down and minutely inspected.
In Photo 12, for instance, the trigger looks good, with fine lines (fakes are usuallly much cruder).
The cleaning rod, on the other hand, looks rather home-made.
Photo 5 shows that the block comes up too far when the action is closed.
Photo 13 shows that the R-H horn of the extractor is missing or bent.

The rifle may a mixmaster.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Anzac15

I'm sure Patrick will know, are all Belgian MHs of the commercial variety? Or did they actually fill official military contracts?

---

I don't know for sure, but I suspect they were all commercial. Of course, any nation is free to buy up commercial rifles and distribute them to its security forces as it sees fit. But military contract Belgian M-Hs? I don't think so. A military contract rifle is usually marked with a national crest or some other indication of the end user nation or military organization, as a proof of ownership. I have not yet seen such a Belgian M-H, which is, of course, no proof that none ever existed!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by read6737

My other MH is a Nepalese one. Dated 1886. In very good shootable condition. I have put about 50 rounds through it so far. See pic.

---

And that looks like a very good one!

OK quick reply as I have to get out to work.
The action is loose when not cocked thus the high block.
It is OK when cocked.
The extractor is not broken both claws are there.
The cleaning rod was a devil to get out, but I don't think it is hand made.
The MH was in a bad state when I got it.
The outside had had a light clean.
The inside of it action and chamber was full of grit and rust, not heavy rust though light ish.surface. Took ages to get it out, now just looks and feels aged.
As yet I have not taken the wood off, a few tight screws to undo.
I am taking my time as I can be a little ham fisted if in a hurry.
Is there a trick to showing up hard to read markings?

I know zero about the Belgian MHs.
and I only know a little about the british ones.

Yep, I'm learning just as you are, Read..in fact, I think you should just go ahead and sell me that Belgian so that I may research it even further! :)

Got the wood off without breaking anything.
What a mess under the cannon. Gunk dust and rust.
There a few under the cannon. by the block looks like Nos 374? may be a 5 or 4
then what looks like a V or a Y think it is a Y.
then a very round O I think there may have been something in it an X may be.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by read6737

then what looks like a V or a Y think it is a Y. then a very round O I think there may have been something in it an X may be.

---

You could be looking at a proof mark and/or a maker's mark. Please post a photo.

Was taking pics as you posted.
Hope you like them.
The first one looks interesting.