Abulg1972
Ultimate Member
I thought I'd share a story about how I almost got hosed today in an effort to convince everyone that we need to spend money on reference books if we're going to spend a lot of money on firearms.
I'm particularly fond of Argentine Mausers, so I am always on the lookout for a nice one. When I bought my first Model 1891 and was looking spend bank on a Model 1909, I decided that I needed to buy Colin Webster's book on Argentine Mausers. It was $70, which was a lot, but I figured it was a good investment.
So, fast forward to today. I've been watching an Argentine Model 1891 "cavalry carbine" on the famous auction site. It is a very nice looking carbine. The receiver was made by Lowe, so I knew it had to be old. The metal is almost perfect, the wood is beautiful, it has all the marks you'd expect to see on this kind of firearm, and the serial number on the stock matched the numbers on the receiver and the barrel. Given the activity and price of the auction, I felt pretty excited that I would be able to win it.
As I was getting ready to bid, though, I noticed that the nose cap just didn't look right to me. It didn't have any ears around the front sight (see pic), and I had always seen those on a cavalry carbine (see pic). I pulled out Webster's book and started poring over the pictures and text. The first thing I noticed was that Webster reports that no carbine was ever made in that serial number range - not by Lowe and not by DWM. I then read that Argentina sold a bunch of unassembled carbine parts to Peru in 1901 and Peru agreed to retain the numbering system, so I thought maybe this carbine was one of them. I started to get really excited. I then remembered, though, that the receiver was made by Lowe, and a review of Webster's book showed me that Lowe stopped making carbines in 1895 and stopped making rifles in 1896. So, I knew that my theory couldn't be right. Based on the manufacturer and the serial number, the only conclusion I could reach was that the rifle was made as a long rifle in 1893, and someone, somewhere cut it down to carbine length. Webster does say that Peru did cut down some of the long rifles it received in 1901, but, again, that likely didn't happen with a Lowe-made rifle. I then started seeing other things that I had missed and that proved I was right. First, I noticed that the rear sight leaf went out to 2,000 meters (see pic), which is what the long rifle had. The carbine's rear sight leaf only went out to 1,400 meters (see pic). Second, the butt stock had a sling swivel aligned perpendicular to the bottom of the stock (see pic), which matched a long rifle, but carbines have a fixed "saddle ring" that runs parallel to the bottom of the stock (see pic). Third, my instinct on the nose cap was right - the nose cap on all cavalry carbines had ears. Fourth, the hand guard did not extend all the way to the lower barrel band like a carbine should - the hand guard matched exactly the hand guard on a long rifle. Finally, the "2" in the bolt's serial number appeared to have a stretched look (see pic), which, based on all of the above, led me to conclude that someone had bent the bolt to look like a carbine bolt.
So, I thanked my lucky stars and let the auction go. It just sold for $325, after 26 bids. I know that's not a ton of money, and maybe that's a good buy for someone who just wants a deer gun, but, as a collector looking to built a proper collection, I would have considered that a big mistake. Buy and read your books, because caveat emptor applies.
I'm particularly fond of Argentine Mausers, so I am always on the lookout for a nice one. When I bought my first Model 1891 and was looking spend bank on a Model 1909, I decided that I needed to buy Colin Webster's book on Argentine Mausers. It was $70, which was a lot, but I figured it was a good investment.
So, fast forward to today. I've been watching an Argentine Model 1891 "cavalry carbine" on the famous auction site. It is a very nice looking carbine. The receiver was made by Lowe, so I knew it had to be old. The metal is almost perfect, the wood is beautiful, it has all the marks you'd expect to see on this kind of firearm, and the serial number on the stock matched the numbers on the receiver and the barrel. Given the activity and price of the auction, I felt pretty excited that I would be able to win it.
As I was getting ready to bid, though, I noticed that the nose cap just didn't look right to me. It didn't have any ears around the front sight (see pic), and I had always seen those on a cavalry carbine (see pic). I pulled out Webster's book and started poring over the pictures and text. The first thing I noticed was that Webster reports that no carbine was ever made in that serial number range - not by Lowe and not by DWM. I then read that Argentina sold a bunch of unassembled carbine parts to Peru in 1901 and Peru agreed to retain the numbering system, so I thought maybe this carbine was one of them. I started to get really excited. I then remembered, though, that the receiver was made by Lowe, and a review of Webster's book showed me that Lowe stopped making carbines in 1895 and stopped making rifles in 1896. So, I knew that my theory couldn't be right. Based on the manufacturer and the serial number, the only conclusion I could reach was that the rifle was made as a long rifle in 1893, and someone, somewhere cut it down to carbine length. Webster does say that Peru did cut down some of the long rifles it received in 1901, but, again, that likely didn't happen with a Lowe-made rifle. I then started seeing other things that I had missed and that proved I was right. First, I noticed that the rear sight leaf went out to 2,000 meters (see pic), which is what the long rifle had. The carbine's rear sight leaf only went out to 1,400 meters (see pic). Second, the butt stock had a sling swivel aligned perpendicular to the bottom of the stock (see pic), which matched a long rifle, but carbines have a fixed "saddle ring" that runs parallel to the bottom of the stock (see pic). Third, my instinct on the nose cap was right - the nose cap on all cavalry carbines had ears. Fourth, the hand guard did not extend all the way to the lower barrel band like a carbine should - the hand guard matched exactly the hand guard on a long rifle. Finally, the "2" in the bolt's serial number appeared to have a stretched look (see pic), which, based on all of the above, led me to conclude that someone had bent the bolt to look like a carbine bolt.
So, I thanked my lucky stars and let the auction go. It just sold for $325, after 26 bids. I know that's not a ton of money, and maybe that's a good buy for someone who just wants a deer gun, but, as a collector looking to built a proper collection, I would have considered that a big mistake. Buy and read your books, because caveat emptor applies.
