Chilean Mauser Long Rifles

[capt14k]

I recently acquired what I believe to be an original all matching 1893 Chilean Mauser that was originally meant for the Boers (C Block) to go with my 1895 Chilean Mauser which I have had for a few years. Curious if the sling on the 1893 is original and what the stipling on the stock is from. The 1895 is mostly matching but it is missing the cleaning rod, the safety doesn't match, and the rear sight is close, but the numbers are reversed. Also the crest and Cartouche seems different than that which is in Ball's book.

All comments are welcome.

Also I am in search of Chilean 1895 Short and Carbine as well as 1912 Long and Short in all matching and original condition to complete my Chilean collection. If anyone has one to sell please PM me.

1893 Chilean















Chilean 1895
















Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[indy1919a4]

I recently acquired what I believe to be an original all matching 1893 Chilean Mauser that was originally meant for the Boers (C Block) to go with my 1895 Chilean Mauser which I have had for a few years. Curious if the sling on the 1893 is original and what the stipling on the stock is from. The 1895 is mostly matching but it is missing the cleaning rod, the safety doesn't match, and the rear sight is close, but the numbers are reversed. Also the crest and Cartouche seems different than that which is in Ball's book.

All comments are welcome.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Beautiful rifles.. I would tend to think the safety may be just a factory error, those guns are so clean.. So what is the difference in your crest.. ??? I do not see a difference??

[capt14k]

I recently acquired what I believe to be an original all matching 1893 Chilean Mauser that was originally meant for the Boers (C Block) to go with my 1895 Chilean Mauser which I have had for a few years. Curious if the sling on the 1893 is original and what the stipling on the stock is from. The 1895 is mostly matching but it is missing the cleaning rod, the safety doesn't match, and the rear sight is close, but the numbers are reversed. Also the crest and Cartouche seems different than that which is in Ball's book.

All comments are welcome.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Beautiful rifles.. I would tend to think the safety may be just a factory error, those guns are so clean.. So what is the difference in your crest.. ??? I do not see a difference??

Crest in book looks to come to a point. Also Cartouche seems to have a date on mine.




Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[72 usmc]

Curious if the sling on the 1893 is original

The sling is incorrect from what little shows. It appears to be a 1903 Springfield US sling. On my 1895 Chilean Mausers I got this type of sling with the rifles when Gander Mountain sold tons of 1895 rifles at $165 back around 2007/8????
For what I think is a correct sling is also found on 1916 rifles, see
http://www.rollanet.org/~stacyw/spanish ... _sling.htm

http://www.casewickantiques.net/ISA122.html

But some also had a square buckleon a very old sling, so which one is correct is unknown to me. See this square buckle sling.
https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Spanish-Maus ... 2062658805

Back in the day 2007, the rifles at the Gander store, about 30-40 rifles at each store had matching and non matching specimens some with and without slings. My two matching, 1895 long rifle, Chilean mausers had the curved buckle sling with well worn leather. All rifles had cleaning rods. Now some of the dogs were converted to .308, most others were original caliber 7mm mauser. Both calibers were offered at that time.
This came out , http://dutchman.rebooty.com/1895Chile.html , and all of the .308 rifles went to the Green bay store and were sold off to someplace due to possible safety/libility concerns around late 2009. I never saw any of the 1893 versions.

[capt14k]

Curious if the sling on the 1893 is original

The sling is incorrect from what little shows. It appears to be a 1903 Springfield US sling. On my 1895 Chilean Mausers I got this type of sling with the rifles when Gander Mountain sold tons of 1895 rifles at $165 back around 2007/8????
For what I think is a correct sling is also found on 1916 rifles, see
http://www.rollanet.org/~stacyw/spanish ... _sling.htm

http://www.casewickantiques.net/ISA122.html

But some also had a square buckleon a very old sling, so which one is correct is unknown to me. See this square buckle sling.
https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Spanish-Maus ... 2062658805

Back in the day 2007, the rifles at the Gander store, about 30-40 rifles at each store had matching and non matching specimens some with and without slings. My two matching, 1895 long rifle, Chilean mausers had the curved buckle sling with well worn leather. All rifles had cleaning rods. Now some of the dogs were converted to .308, most others were original caliber 7mm mauser. Both calibers were offered at that time.
This came out , http://dutchman.rebooty.com/1895Chile.html , and all of the .308 rifles went to the Green bay store and were sold off to someplace due to possible safety/libility concerns around late 2009. I never saw any of the 1893 versions.

So sling was added by someone. Thank you for the info.

Everything else on the 1893 looks correct? How about the 1895?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[72 usmc]

Your stock matches and does have a cartouche. It is intact. Cleaning rod will be stamped to match. 265
A nice looking 1895. Note the 1895 does not use a 1912 bayonet. Both the Chilean Mauser 1895 and 1912 use a slightly different bayonet with similar markings. The barrel loop is different on each bayonet. Libertytreecollectors had square buckle slings at one time see:
https://www.libertytreecollectors.com/p ... ategory=50
The dutchmans link shows a rifle with a square buckle sling????? It appears my rifles may have a Spanish sling rather than a Chilean sling. I believe the square one shown below is more correct. The Gander rifles had both types of slings. Most rifles were missing or had cracked off slings back in 2008 when these Chilean antiques were dumped on the marked. They are great shooters

bayonet pictures here: http://worldbayonets.com/Bayonet_Identi ... ile_2.html


Here is a link to the libertytreecollectors reference library showing details of an intact rifle like Gander sold back in the day. And another aspect was the non .308 specimens did not have import marks on the barrel. Neither of mine are import marked because I think they were considered antiques???? However the .308 I remember did have a mark on the barrel.
see these fine photos: https://www.libertytreecollectors.com/p ... oduct=4757

Below are some photos of the details from the above source, libertytreecollectors. Screen shots of details in there better photos from their reference library for a 1895 Chilean rifle .

Screen Shot 2018-07-11 at 9.43.09 AM.png (171.75 KiB) Viewed 1216 times

Screen Shot 2018-07-11 at 9.43.32 AM.png (243.56 KiB) Viewed 1216 times

Screen Shot 2018-07-11 at 9.44.19 AM.png (345.44 KiB) Viewed 1216 times

A 1895 short rifle from the reference library:
https://www.libertytreecollectors.com/p ... ategory=82
A 1912 Chilean rifle from the reference library:
https://www.libertytreecollectors.com/p ... ategory=82

[retread12345678]

Years ago I went to SARCO and saw racks of M. 1916 7mm Mauser short rifles with these type slings.

[capt14k]

Anyone know when all the bolt parts started becoming numbered? They are numbered on my 1895 but not my 1893?

Why does the crest in Ball's book look so different?

Do only some have dates under the stock Cartouche?

Seems both my 1893 and 1895 are zeroed to 300m and have the single side spring which would make them the older original 1893 sights according to Wall's chart?

Any guess on the stock stipling on the 1893. Doesn't look like the marks a firing pin from disassembling a bolt would make?




Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[72 usmc]

Why does the crest in Ball's book look so different?

I am on page 39 of Balls, " Mauser Military Rifles of the World, second ed, 2000 and both pictures show the same crest . Just that the photo on the right of an 1895 rifle is from a poorly stamped example. A poor photo. Balls 1893 crest is the same as the 1895 photo shown in my close up of the Libertytreecollectors rifle.

Some rifles have 1895, some 1898 and some MF, others may have other dates on the stock cartouch. On some stocks the cartouch is worn away.

[capt14k]

Why does the crest in Ball's book look so different?

I am on page 39 of Balls, " Mauser Military Rifles of the World, second ed, 2000 and both pictures show the same crest . Just that the photo on the right of an 1895 rifle is from a poorly stamped example. A poor photo. Balls 1893 crest is the same as the 1895 photo shown in my close up of the Libertytreecollectors rifle.

Some rifles have 1895, some 1898 and some MF, others may have other dates on the stock cartouch. On some stocks the cartouch is worn away.

I guess it could just be a poor example of the crest.


The 1893 Chilean is the same.

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk

[72 usmc]

This might be of interest. see link You may have read all of these???
https://forums.gunboards.com/showthread ... Rifle-7X57

This lower one from castboolits is great. Lots of info & worth a print out on paper. However, 3 pages of info and to print out it comes to 22 (p.1), 16 (p.2), 12 (p.3) total approximately 50 pages at 100% To decrease pages you can use their Thread tools : show printable version: but you do not get the photos. Good info on 93 vs 95
http://castboolits.gunloads.com/showthr ... 895-Mauser

https://forums.gunboards.com/showthread ... uot-prefix

http://www.carbinesforcollectors.com/chilepage1.html

[mrbig381]

I picked up a 95 a few years ago with the square buckle. The seller told me it was a Chilean sling.

[mrbig381]

It looks just like the one in your picture.