Don't know much about the mausers, but the style and format of the markings of the rifle remind me of the 1910 MS 9.5x57 I got from JudgeG. It had typical continental markings and lettering, then had british markings rather slopily applied to the barrel, right down to the caliber (375 nitro) being applied "upside down. The case makers label was missing, but I suspect it was common for a british maker to buy a continental gun, reproof and stamp it with the british calier designation and resell it under their label, with no actual construction occuring.

You guys are a wealth of information, though easily distracted. Back to the original gun posted, Does anyone know anything about "Charles Osborne"? Any guestimates as to what this gun would be worth?

It would be very hard to clean a 10.75x68 chamber with a 404 reamer, not impossible but it is very risky. I suppose one could set the chamber back and re-cut it, but I'm not even sure about that..but it would change the barrel length so you should be able to tell. Based on that and my experienc with the 10.75x68 I doubt the gun was ever a 10.75x68. That said I have seen it done just with a chamber reamer, because of the different in specs on some of the early 404, but the gun usually ended up with a long chamber and required fireforming of cases due to the very tight tolerences in rechamber the 10.75x68 to a 404 Jefferys..Its tight and you don't have any room for mistakes and even then its iffy...

quote:

Originally posted by Atkinson:
It would be very hard to clean a 10.75x68 chamber with a 404 reamer, not impossible but it is very risky.

Sorry 505, I do get distracted but just like to say I was surprised with Ray's post quoted in part above. I thought it was a reasonably common occurrence to open up 10.75x68 chambers to 404J. My own Type A Mauser has had this done and it seems quite a few of these Mausers were converted this way if the rifle was to continue as a work horse rather than a collector. I got the impression from reading Keith Luckhurst's article on reloading for the 404J that it was not a problem with his own Type A having been done for him.
Not withstanding this Ray may well have the knowledge that it is not an easy job to do?

Since I cannot examine the gun or its markings from here, what I expressed was an opinion based on its styling and what I could see of its markings, not necessarily God's Own Truth of its history.

I do know that a fair number of .404 Nitro Express Rimless (Jeffery) chamberings were done up from 10.75x68s back in the day, though I have no idea if Jeffery's itself actually did any such.

As to how the marking .404 Express came to be on the top of the barrel...well, I do not know if that was orginally put there when the gun was first built, or not. Stamps & stamping are much easier & less expensive to buy & use than building whole guns though.

I do know, from having briefly owned quite a few old Mausers in .404 Jeffery (or 10.75x73) that, at least for some years after the round's introduction, chamber reamers were not very standardized among all "gunmaking" houses in England and Europe.

I would have to guess that with modern standardized reamers, Ray may well be correct....i.e., that it is a "touchy" job with today's reamers. That may or may not have been true with the reamer used on this particular gun, IF in fact it was rechambered and prooved (or not).

If would sure make things easier if guns, as well as walls, could talk!

quote:

Originally posted by eagle27:
Not withstanding this Ray may well have the knowledge that it is not an easy job to do?

I am confused as I recall Ray himself having a 10.75x68 reamed to 404, and I recall him saying the recoil would rattle your teeth and the rifle was pretty light. But then, my memory is not the best.

Ray, did your rifle end up with a long chamber? When you sold it was it sold as a wildcat, or????