Mauser Chileno modelo 1895

[usabaker]

Say what?? 3000 dollars or pesos?

I was being kind saying $3000.00, I think it was more in the 3900.00 area. I was at lunch so I didn't have time to take pictures. I took a quick look I think it was a 1903A4 what struck me as odd is that the finish on the scope was well worn, but the rifle parkerization was super clean. I'll have to go back and take pictures, I don't think it will get sold any time soon. They also have a 1903 Remington barreled receiver with sights, upper and lower rings at a really cheap price of $600.00 I was told it was that much because it has the cut out for the Pedersen Device, fancy that...

Information

Warning: This is a relatively older thread This discussion is older than 360 days. Some information contained in it may no longer be current.

[Patrick Chadwick]

I took a quick look I think it was a 1903A4 what struck me as odd is that the finish on the scope was well worn, but the rifle parkerization was super clean.

One of the basic checks for originality, which does not require any expert knowledge of the artefact being investigated, is:

Are wear patterns, scratches, machining marks etc. consistent?

Inconsistency is the biggest giveaway when items are modified, falsified, or downright faked.

So the inconsistency, which quite rightly caught your attention and distrurbs you, is in this case an indication that a (possibly genuine) sniper scope has been retrospectively fitted to a non-sniper rifle, in order to upvalue it in the eyes of an undiscerning buyer.

In particular, while a used rifle that showed superior performance may have been selected for alteration to a sniper configuration by fitting a scope, the scope in such a case would be new.

The other way around: fitting an well-used scope to a new rifle, strikes me as being extremely implausible as an official (i.e. arsenal/base workshop) operation.

Take some photos, post them here, and let's all have a look!

[usabaker]

Take some photos, post them here, and let's all have a look!

I'll stop in the shop on Monday or Tuesday and take some pictures. He had a box full of 1903 Springfield parts I want to go through anyhow.

---------- Post added at 09:04 PM ---------- Previous post was at 09:02 PM ----------

Be careful about 03A4's. Easy to fake if you are a newbie.

Yeah I've become wiser as I learn more. But I could not afford $3K + even if I wanted it.

[daveboy]

Patrick, inconsistency in finish/wear is usually a good indicator of something not being what it is presented as. However, one exception might be the scopes on the Remington 03-A4. Remember, these scopes were on quick-release mounts. So, although I am certain that a particular scope stayed paired with a certain rifle for a time, they were always getting replaced and swapped during repairs, reassignments, etc.. I know that when the DCM sold A4s many years ago, they were sold with the mounts, but sans scope because as I understand it the Army held onto the scopes for several more years. My point being, on 03-A4 rifles, I would not be surprised to see wear/finish inconsistency between scope and rifle. But, one sure-fire way to spot a fake A4 is where the serial # is. If you can read the entire serial number with the scope mount installed, then you have an A4. If part of the number is covered by the scope mount, then you have a fake.