This is for fun, nothing serious I would be interested in what others see. I'm interested in more than the misspelling of Mr. Griffin's name.
I have no interest in the auction or know the seller.

Griffin & Howe

Well...I am certainly no expert, but checking is amateurish and sloppy, .... not G&H quality.
Also, where is G&H identity on gun?

Must have been one of their "warm up" rifles. I've seen Mark X Viscount's that looked more finished than that, and for a hell of a lot less.

May well be a G&H as I'm no expert on them having seen only a few in real life. It would not appear to me to be a G&H. Just does not LOOK like one. It appears to have a Redfield base for what thats worth. The scope looks like too late a model. The stock treatment and fit around the bolt release does not look correct. The reciever sight would look to me as not having been installed by G&H because of the groove for the sight slide (or whatever that verticle part of sight is called) in the stock. Bolt handle does not look correct to me either. May well be a genuine G&H but I would not be proud to own it and display it as one and certainly would not pay that price in any case. Incidentally Clayton said you have a most impressive gunroom and it's a pleasure to view your collection in it. Please don't stop with your AR displays they are beyond pleasure to view.

What happened to the bolt release? Like others I certainly don't claim to be any type of expert on G&H rifles.

If bad spelling was against the law, I would be serving life with no parole.

Terry

Several things:

1. Plugged sling swivel inlet of size and proper location for military type, just behind pistol grip
2. ?? splice of darker wood in the pistol grip area? Hard to say, but it isn't just a mineral streak, the whole lower part of the PG is darker, in an otherwise homogeneously colored piece of walnut. The coloring also doesn't extend beyond the rear border of checkering... leading into #3:
3. Pic #5 from the BOTTOM shows what looks like two borders on the checkering panel, suggesting it was somewhat sloppily recut.
4. Relief around the bolt release - looks similar to the relief required for the Lyman sight which mounted on the bolt release (don't know model #).

Looks like a nice older rifle that's been "improved" into a shooter.

Todd

PS Just noticed price - HAR, HAR HAR

I have never seen a G&H bespoke rifle that had no cheekpiece. Most have their traditional teardrop design that starts all the way up at the nose of the comb.

Also, their early rifles will have the Griffin & Howe New York address on the barrel.

I have an original G&H catalog that dates roughly I think to the same time that the sellers says this rifle was built. The stock on the rifle in no way resembles the stock shown in the catalog. The cataloged stock has much more drop, a pancake cheekpiece, and a less pronounced grip. I'm not an expert, I've only seen a couple G&H's in the flesh, but have looked at lots of photo's. It doesn't look like an all original to me. Maybe modified?

Well you guys seem to have worked it all out. The rifle is marked G&H with a number of 1943. During the depression G&H would remodel a Springfield Armory stock but I have never seen a Mauser. This looks like it could have been a military stock with wood added for the pistol grip and the rear sling swivel filled. The wood that is removed below the bolt release was for a Lyman 35. Can one of you Mauser folks tell us which stock this might have been? I fear much has been done to the rifle after it left the G&H shop.

There were not many military 1898 stocks that didn't have a unit disk, bolt take down, or sling keeper slot in the buttstock area, or a swivel in the wrist. There are NONE that I am aware of that lacked a military style crossbolt, and the limited, non-closeup views of the that area in the auction pics do not show a plug (could still be a very closely grain matched one, but given the absolute mismatch of the PG wood filler, I doubt that).

So, my guess is a reworked post-war generic sporter, with what was probably a rounded pistol grip teutonic stock that got 'Americanized.' OR, the same, using a non-completed military stock that didn't get a crossbolt.

Kurt, FYI early G&H rifles without cheekpieces are uncommon but not rare.

Looking at how uneven the jeweling is on the bolt I would say that if G&H had this rifle in their shop it would be as an example of how NOT to do things.

Only one cmt, and that is $5400 is way too much money for that rifle. The rifle has not been cared for; Rust, checkering boogered up, not a good specimen.

Don

quote:

Originally posted by Michael Petrov:
This is for fun, nothing serious I would be interested in what others see. I'm interested in more than the misspelling of Mr. Griffin's name.
I have no interest in the auction or know the seller.

Griffin & Howe

It sure is not a Griffin and Howe rifle. But again the G&H might stand for Gonif and Honyak ya think?

Two key photos are missing: the fron sight and the barrel inscription. The lack of a cheekpiece in no way disqualifies this gun as an original G&H. There are two rifles on Mike Schwandts website now so configered. I have three without. Early rifles may not fit what most of us consider as their standard features. I have a G&H modified NRA sporter built along these same lines. It appears to me that it came as a receiver sight rifle and was drilled and tapped later. The grip coloration could be a graft line and I think it is. The hardest thing to explain is, as has been mentioned the gap under the bolt stop/release. All said and done it still is too expensive. But, it is a 7 m/m Mauser and will bring more than it should. gduffey

The gap under the bolt stop is were a Lyman 35 was mounted, if you have never seen one I'll try to post a picture.

So....for some reason they scrapped the Lyman 35, drilled and tapped it for Redfield bases, and drilled and tapped the right side of the rear ring for a Lyman reciever sight. Which by the way will not work either with the bases. However somehow the slide/aperature piece remains. Still a nice rifle and a great clean-up/detail project. I would like to own it at the right price. Its a G&H its just been around the block a few times. gduffey

It's a mystery alright, I'm still trying to figure out what stock they started with. When the scope was mounted they had to bend the bolt and cut a relief into the stock for the bent bolt. Might make a fun project for someone if the price was right. I fear the owner will have it for a long time as it is.

Maybe it has something to do with the bolt release and the rear scope base. You would be able to leave the rec. sight alone and still operate the bolt release. Crazy but who knows. I just have a gut....this IS the original stock. gduffey

Given the barrel band swivel I think the original owner had a military swivel base installed in the butt so the rifle would carry higher, particularly if he likes to carry butt up. After using it he probably found the swivel banged the steel grip cap or perhaps just changed his mind and went to a standard swivel stud. The curve of the grip, checkering pattern all look G & H to my eye. Changes have been made over time and the rifle has been used a lot. I think we might confuse honest wear (bolt jewelling, checkering) with substandard work. Not a high end but a functional rifle which was kept working.