Hello All,

I Need Help Identifying the Maker of this Custom Rifle.

Maybe someone will recognize the checkering style.

According to the Family, it was custom made for Reynold H Rusch - He was from Minocqua, Wisconsin. I was told it was made for him in the 1950's or 60's, perhaps (?) by a Wisconsin Gunsmith.

It was built on a 1930's FN 98 Mauser Action ("Greek Contract" w/ Original Factory Barrel in 8x57 cal.)

Here's the specs:

- Mannlicher Stock of French Walnut w/ Metal Forend Cap
- Shadow Out-Line Roll-Over Cheek Piece
- Buffalo Horn Grip Cap w/ Compass
- Buffalo Horn Butt Plate
- Single Panel Wrap-Around Skip-Line Forend Checkering w/ Fluers
- Two Panel Skip-Line Grip Checkering w/ Fluers
- 13-5/8" LOP - 17-1/2" Barrel - 7-1/4 pounds
- Lyman 57 Rear Sight
- Lyman Ramp Front Sight w/ Brass Bead
- Buehler Low Profile Safety
- Jeweled Bolt
- Custom Turned-Down Bolt Handle
- Checkered Bolt Knob
- Checkered Trigger
- Engraved Screws
- Sling Swivels

Bump for a very nice rifle, good luck with your search.jc

Have you taken it out of the stock to look for initials or a signature underneath?

It looks like a Leonard Mews

He was from Wisconsin too I believe

quote:

Originally posted by tiggertate:
Have you taken it out of the stock to look for initials or a signature underneath?

Hello tiggertate,

Thanks for the reply. Yes, I've looked and there is nothing stamped in the barrel channel.

quote:

Originally posted by robert lerner:
It looks like a Leonard Mews

Hello lerner,

Thanks for the reply. Its definitely NOT Leonard Mews. I collect Mews rifles and have 15 in my collection. I know his style intimately and its not one of his.

Whoever did the work, was an amateur for sure, the checkering is terrible and doesn't follow the first cut..the shaping is for lack of a better word is incorrect..It is definatl not a Mews rifle or any well know stock maker. Sorry but you asked and I don't want you to be misled as to the quality of the gun.

Ray take a closer look, I think what you are seeing is a detail of the checkering where the builder did an outline or shadow line pattern.
Nice old gun even though it's not my style.

quote:

Originally posted by Atkinson:
Whoever did the work, was an amateur for sure, the checkering is terrible and doesn't follow the first cut..the shaping is for lack of a better word is incorrect..It is definatl not a Mews rifle or any well know stock maker. Sorry but you asked and I don't want you to be misled as to the quality of the gun.

And you gave me crap when I said something derogetory, but truthful, about your buddy Jack. Talk about hypocrisy

I'm with Ray on this one. Someone did a lot of work but knew very little about stocks. For example, a "Monte Carlo" wave-like cheek rest has no purpose, and in-fact would make it almost impossible to get a proper eye alignment with an open sights only rifle like this. There are many more aspects that are flat wrong, but is a very pretty piece of wood, and from the photos was a labor of love for someone. Yes, I don't think it was done by a professional gunsmith, but by an inexperienced but talented amateur.

quote:

Originally posted by Jim Kobe:

quote:

Originally posted by Atkinson:
Whoever did the work, was an amateur for sure, the checkering is terrible and doesn't follow the first cut..the shaping is for lack of a better word is incorrect......"

And you gave me crap when I said something derogetory, but truthful, about your buddy Jack. Talk about hypocrisy

Hello Jim Kobe,
Thanks for your reply.

Some people just like to throw sticks-and-stones.

quote:

Originally posted by Snellstrom:
Ray take a closer look, I think what you are seeing is a detail of the checkering where the builder did an outline or shadow line pattern.
Nice old gun even though it's not my style.

Hello Snellstrom,
Thanks for your reply.

Your are Spot-On ... !

quote:

Originally posted by Toomany Tools:
I'm with Ray on this one. Someone did a lot of work but knew very little about stocks. For example, a "Monte Carlo" wave-like cheek rest has no purpose, and in-fact would make it almost impossible to get a proper eye alignment with an open sights only rifle like this. There are many more aspects that are flat wrong, but is a very pretty piece of wood, and from the photos was a labor of love for someone. Yes, I don't think it was done by a professional gunsmith, but by an inexperienced but talented amateur.

Hello Tommy Tools,
Thanks for the reply.

Its been a while, about 3 yers, but I finally got around to using this little beauty on a Wisconsin Deer hunt. Lucky the maker of this stock didn't pay attention to your opinion about the Monte Carlo cheek-piece. He must have been about my size, because it fits me perfectly. When I shoulder the rifle and bring it into shooting position, my eye is exactly in-line with the iron sights. This allowed me to make a "quick" snap-shot at this nice buck, as he ran across an open field. I collect a lot of Classic Custom rifles by renowned makers. In this case, Pretty doesn't have to be perfect.

Buckstix;
Kudos to you for taking that rifle back into the field and using it. I am no expert, have stocked a rifle or two (poorly), and I say that the work is better than "amateur". Likely had to be done from the block as I have never seen a pattern like it - not an old Bishop or Fajen for sure. It is not classic and for that reason will draw incoming fire to the position.......just dig a foxhole and keep using the old beauty. If it gets to the point that it is hurting your eyes too much, I will provide a shipping address.....
Thanks.
John

That is any interesting looking rifle, although not my style. Regardless, congrats on your successful hunt, and getting the rifle back out where it belongs.

Buckstix:
Just a thought, but that rollover cheek piece and the European walnut is very similar to a stock that I had rough-finished by Herter's in the late '60's. If you're not familiar with them, they were the Cabelas of the 50's to the '70's, dealing imported sporting gear by mail order to include archery, fishing, trapping, shooting, and most anything else you could ever dream of, all out of a warehouse in Waseca, MN. They had an extensive inventory of stock blanks, a shop that did stockwork and gunsmithing, and a lot of their work from that era resembled your mystery gun: exotic checkering patterns, rosewood or ebony grip caps, forend tips, buttplates, etc., a copycat Winslow/Weatherby flair mixed with Old World Mannlicher. I don't think their work was of the highest quality, but as a 16 year old on a paper route budget it sure looked good to me! If you can lay your hands on an old Herter's catalog you'll see what I mean, and I'll wager you'll find that checkering pattern, the Mannlicher stock, cheek piece, grip cap, etc. as catalogued options.

To me, the rifle is, stylistically, a little weird but not badly done. It's interesting to see rifles from builders who have a distinct style; whether you like the style or not. Regards, Bill

quote:

Originally posted by Bill Leeper:
To me, the rifle is, stylistically, a little weird but not badly done. It's interesting to see rifles from builders who have a distinct style; whether you like the style or not. Regards, Bill

Agreed. In the end, if the owner likes it, it gets used! Isn't that purpose?

I also thought of Herter's when I say it. As George Leonard Herter would say, "This is the best . . . . .."

quote:

Originally posted by TexasJohn:
Buckstix;
Kudos to you for taking that rifle back into the field and using it. I am no expert, have stocked a rifle or two (poorly), and I say that the work is better than "amateur". Likely had to be done from the block as I have never seen a pattern like it - not an old Bishop or Fajen for sure. It is not classic and for that reason will draw incoming fire to the position.......just dig a foxhole and keep using the old beauty. If it gets to the point that it is hurting your eyes too much, I will provide a shipping address.....
Thanks.
John

Hello TexasJohn,
Thanks for the reply.

I like hunting with rifles that I can admire while waiting for game to appear.

quote:

Originally posted by Firearmdoc:
That is any interesting looking rifle, although not my style. Regardless, congrats on your successful hunt, and getting the rifle back out where it belongs.

Hello Firearmdoc,
Thanks for the reply.

Its always nice when you have sucess with a newly acquired gun.

quote:

Originally posted by big_bwana:
Buckstix:
" ... Just a thought, but that rollover cheek piece and the European walnut is very similar to a stock that I had rough-finished by Herter's in the late '60's. ... "

Hello bwana,
Thanks for the reply.

I don't think its a Herter's creation. If you look close, you can see a thin addition to both the grip-cap, and the butt-plate. I believe this is something that the only the stock maker would do, not a Herter's option.

quote:

Originally posted by Bill Leeper:
To me, the rifle is, stylistically, a little weird but not badly done. It's interesting to see rifles from builders who have a distinct style; whether you like the style or not. Regards, Bill

Hello Bill Leeper,
Thanks for the reply.

The fact that its "different", (a little weird) is what enticed me to buy.

quote:

Originally posted by z1r:
Agreed. In the end, if the owner likes it, it gets used! Isn't that purpose?

Hello z1r,
Thanks for the reply.

Yes, I like it, and I used it, and will use it again.

quote:

Originally posted by loud-n-boomer:
I also thought of Herter's when I say it. As George Leonard Herter would say, "This is the best . . . . .."

Hello loud-n-boomer,
Thanks for the reply.

I noticed the spacer in front of the butt plate and a corresponding spacer under the pistol grip. Not sure why a stock maker would do such a thing although having a spacer on the butt would allow fitting of a recoil pad thicker than and in place of the butt plate and spacer without affecting the LOP i.e. is a custom made gun with LOP specifically set for the customer and no need to shorten the stock at a later date if fitting a recoil pad. Maybe that was the thought of the stock maker?
Spacer under the pistol grip cap no value but just to offset the butt spacer?

Somewhat unusual style but then so are many custom guns made to customers specifications.

Poor design and no craftsman work shown!! It reminds of some of the students when I was teaching stock making at TSJC in 1993. A discussion with Louie Mrace and Ed Shulin when I went back to teach was based upon the ability of students studying stock making. We came to the conclusion that only about 5 % of students were able to do great stocks. Most could learn metal work on machines, but most didn't have the artist touch to see stock design and properly shape lines of stocks. I see nothing in the above mentioned stock that would be a -D grade or lower. Just my own thoughts

quote:

Originally posted by eagle27:
I noticed the spacer in front of the butt plate and a corresponding spacer under the pistol grip. Not sure why a stock maker would do such a thing although having a spacer on the butt would allow fitting of a recoil pad thicker than and in place of the butt plate and spacer without affecting the LOP i.e. is a custom made gun with LOP specifically set for the customer and no need to shorten the stock at a later date if fitting a recoil pad. Maybe that was the thought of the stock maker?
Spacer under the pistol grip cap no value but just to offset the butt spacer?

Somewhat unusual style but then so are many custom guns made to customers specifications.

Hello eagle27,
Thanks for the reply.

Not sure why the spacers were used. Adjusting LOP by 1/8" seems a poor reason. Perhaps it was the stock-maker's attempt to lengthen the black before he started shaping the stock. If I ever find out who made it, I'll ask him.

quote:

Originally posted by LesBrooks:
Poor design and no craftsman work shown!! It reminds of some of the students when I was teaching stock making at TSJC in 1993. A discussion with Louie Mrace and Ed Shulin when I went back to teach was based upon the ability of students studying stock making. We came to the conclusion that only about 5 % of students were able to do great stocks. Most could learn metal work on machines, but most didn't have the artist touch to see stock design and properly shape lines of stocks. I see nothing in the above mentioned stock that would be a -D grade or lower. Just my own thoughts

Hello LesBrooks,
Thanks for the reply.

Well, I love it! And that's really all that matters, isn't it? Maybe this unknown maker would have failed your class, but the wood to metal fit is perfect, and the inletted diamond in the buffalo horn grip and but-plate are superbly done. The skip-line checkering and quirky borders are "different" to say the least, but that makes it unique. I have about 2 dozen custom stocked rifles from the classic makers of the 50s and 60s, and I enjoy admiring and hunting with this one, as much as with the others.

Looks like it well work just fine.

Do you have any pictures of the inletting- that usually separates the men from the wannabe's.

quote:

Originally posted by p dog shooter:
Looks like it well work just fine.

Hello p dog shooter,
Thanks for the reply.

Yes, it does.

quote:

Originally posted by kda55:
Do you have any pictures of the inletting- that usually separates the men from the wannabe's.

Hello kda55,
Thanks for the reply.

I remember looking inside for a makers mark, but I didn't find one, and I didn't take any pictures. Next time it comes out of the safe, I'll take some.

A former USAF Master Armorer, then custom gun maker John Bunch of Texas could be your rifle maker.

quote:

Originally posted by Bob Nisbet:
A former USAF Master Armorer, then custom gun maker John Bunch of Texas could be your rifle maker.

Hello Bob Nisbet,
Thanks for the reply.

Do you have any examples of his work?

quote:

Originally posted by LesBrooks:
Poor design and no craftsman work shown!! It reminds of some of the students when I was teaching stock making at TSJC in 1993. A discussion with Louie Mrace and Ed Shulin when I went back to teach was based upon the ability of students studying stock making. We came to the conclusion that only about 5 % of students were able to do great stocks. Most could learn metal work on machines, but most didn't have the artist touch to see stock design and properly shape lines of stocks. I see nothing in the above mentioned stock that would be a -D grade or lower. Just my own thoughts

Hell Les: Maybe this is what the client wanted and he had to pay the light bill anyway! Staring out, I turned out crap I wasn't proud of then and hope the work was since destroyed!

Not only to pay the light bill, but to feed three kids. I've seen a lot worse on AR that folks go bonkers over.

To make a proper gunstock requires more than mechanical ability, I call it soul.

Dave

What trigger is in this rifle.

quote:

Originally posted by kda55:
What trigger is in this rifle.

Hello kda55,
Thanks for the reply.

I believe it has the original FN trigger, with it's front checkered.

Being a military action I would assume a 2 stage as all 98's. Looks like it has been spiffed up a bit in profile also. Happy shooting.

My WAG is a non-professional made and checkered this stock. That GREEK or SWISS (?) action was way cool prior to the elevation peep and the hand scratched signature, the latter possibly made by the person that did the woodwork. It is what it is. Not my style, interesting action.....

I don't think it's a Herter's stock as it doesn't have the 'zig zag' white line spacer they were keen on.

Hopefully it makes the owner happy and that is all that counts. I personally don't like to critque another man's rifle.

I personally knew Lenard Brownell and he wished he could have bought back his early work as it took him awhile to learn the craft.

As to my reply, you asked, and I gave an opinnion based on the work Ive seen by Mews? Im sure Mews wouldn't appreciate being comparied to that rifle, simple as that or any rifle he didn't build.

quote:

Originally posted by kda55:
Being a military action I would assume a 2 stage as all 98's. Looks like it has been spiffed up a bit in profile also. Happy shooting.

Hello kda55,
Thanks for your reply.

Yes, its still a 2-stage.

quote:

Originally posted by custombolt:
My WAG is a non-professional made and checkered this stock. That GREEK or SWISS (?) action was way cool prior to the elevation peep and the hand scratched signature, the latter possibly made by the person that did the woodwork. It is what it is. Not my style, interesting action.....

Hello custombolt,
Thanks for the reply.

The scratched signature was the the gun's owner.

quote:

Originally posted by Matt Norman:
I don't think it's a Herter's stock as it doesn't have the 'zig zag' white line spacer they were keen on.

Hopefully it makes the owner happy and that is all that counts. I personally don't like to critque another man's rifle.

I personally knew Lenard Brownell and he wished he could have bought back his early work as it took him awhile to learn the craft.

Hello Matt Norman,
Thanks for the reply.

I agree about it not being a Herters Stock, although Herters did have some without the lighting-bolt spacers. I am sure the owner of the rifle was more than happy with it, since he put his name on the gun.

I know you are correct about some early work of the classic makers. Leonard once told me he laughed when a customer brought in a stock for repair. It was one of the very first stocks that he made some 45 years earlier. He sawed it into pieces and put it in the wood stove, and made the man a whole new stock. He told me he saved the center piece because it brought a smile to his face and reminded him of when he made his first stocks. He gifted it to me in 1988.

quote:

Originally posted by Atkinson:
Whoever did the work, was an amateur for sure, the checkering is terrible and doesn't follow the first cut..the shaping is for lack of a better word is incorrect..It is definatl not a Mews rifle or any well know stock maker. Sorry but you asked and I don't want you to be misled as to the quality of the gun.

quote:

Originally posted by Atkinson:
As to my reply, you asked, and I gave an opinnion based on the work Ive seen by Mews? Im sure Mews wouldn't appreciate being comparied to that rifle, simple as that or any rifle he didn't build.

Hello Atkinson,

As to your earlier reply, I didn't answer.

I asked in my OP if anyone recognized the style in order to determine the maker of the stock. I wasn't really looking for critical opinions of the work. I never compared it to stocks made by Leonard Mews. You know Absolutely Nothing about what Leonard Mews would appreciate, or his opinions of the work of other stock makers. Leonard Mews was my friend and he was always happy to help others who dabbled in stock making, no matter how amateur or crude their work might have been. If you read Monty Kennedy's book; "The checkering and Carving of Gunstocks" you will see several of Leonard's articles intended to help others. Similar articles have appeared in the American Rifleman over the 50s, 60s, and 70s.

I own 19 Mews rifles, two of which were made for Dr. Russell C. Smith, one for Gabby Hayes, and several that were made for members of the Gun Clubs where Leonard and I were members. (the Appleton Rifle & Pistol Club, and the Black Wolf Schuetzenverein) I own a fabulous rifle that Leonard made especially for me, and I also own Leonard's personal Schuetzen rifle that he used in competition at Black Wolf. That one you'd never guess was a Leonard Mews creation because he only made "masterpieces" for others. His own guns had stocks that were very crude, merely functional tools to win matches, which he did regularly.

Based on your posting history, I've noticed that you're pretty quick-on-the-trigger to negatively criticize others. Perhaps you could post some pictures that show your stock making ability.
.
.
.

It's not the first rifle you ever bought Buckstix, I'm certain you know what appeals to you!

quote:

Originally posted by Jmbrown:

Hello Jmbrown,
Thanks for the reply

quote:

Originally posted by theback40:
It's not the first rifle you ever bought Buckstix, I'm certain you know what appeals to you!

Hello theback40,
Thanks for your reply.

You are correct, I have many custom rifles from the classic makers of the 40's, 50's, 60's, and 70's, that appeal to me. This one mostly because it had a very unusual checkering style that I had never seen before.

quote:

Originally posted by buckstix:

quote:

Originally posted by Atkinson:
Whoever did the work, was an amateur for sure, the checkering is terrible and doesn't follow the first cut..the shaping is for lack of a better word is incorrect..It is definatl not a Mews rifle or any well know stock maker. Sorry but you asked and I don't want you to be misled as to the quality of the gun.

quote:

Originally posted by Atkinson:
As to my reply, you asked, and I gave an opinnion based on the work Ive seen by Mews? Im sure Mews wouldn't appreciate being comparied to that rifle, simple as that or any rifle he didn't build.

Hello Atkinson,

As to your earlier reply, I didn't answer.

I asked in my OP if anyone recognized the style in order to determine the maker of the stock. I wasn't really looking for critical opinions of the work. I never compared it to stocks made by Leonard Mews. You know Absolutely Nothing about what Leonard Mews would appreciate, or his opinions of the work of other stock makers. Leonard Mews was my friend and he was always happy to help others who dabbled in stock making, no matter how amateur or crude their work might have been. If you read Monty Kennedy's book; "The checkering and Carving of Gunstocks" you will see several of Leonard's articles intended to help others. Similar articles have appeared in the American Rifleman over the 50s, 60s, and 70s.

I own 19 Mews rifles, two of which were made for Dr. Russell C. Smith, one for Gabby Hayes, and several that were made for members of the Gun Clubs where Leonard and I were members. (the Appleton Rifle & Pistol Club, and the Black Wolf Schuetzenverein) I own a fabulous rifle that Leonard made especially for me, and I also own Leonard's personal Schuetzen rifle that he used in competition at Black Wolf. That one you'd never guess was a Leonard Mews creation because he only made "masterpieces" for others. His own guns had stocks that were very crude, merely functional tools to win matches, which he did regularly.

Based on your posting history, I've noticed that you're pretty quick-on-the-trigger to negatively criticize others. Perhaps you could post some pictures that show your stock making ability.
.
.
.