1896 Dragoon Rifle

[Marcus]

While going through the gun vault yesterday deciding what to sell off next as I continue to dispose of my collection to fund my dog rescue/shelter/sanctuary, I came across this one. So I thought I would take the opportunity show it here before putting it up for sale and it disappears into another collection.

This is an interesting rifle for a number of reasons. First off, pre-Soviet dragoons, especially ones that haven't gone through the post-war Soviet refurb programs and been subjected to the 91/30 sight upgrades are incredibly scarce. Even WW1 versions are almost never seen, but pre-1899 ones are even scarcer....and of course are significantly more desirable and valuable due to their "antique" legal status.

This is one of the Finn Mosins that were imported in the 1950's, so it does not have any of the nasty and disfiguring, Federal graffiti vandalism, import marks that are required and found on guns imported in the 1980's and up, after some of the most onerous and obnoxious restrictions of the hateful and stupid "1968 Gun Control Act" were loosened up a little under Ronald Reagan in the mid 1980's. The lack of import markings helps identify when this rifle was imported, as well as adding value and collectability to collectors like myself who detest the governmental "deranged monkey scribbles" on their collectible historical firearms.

As with most intact and original configuration dragoon rifles it ended up in Finn hands, most likely during the Finnish war for independence from Russia,either captured by the Finns or supplied by their German allies as war aid. As a result it escaped the mutilation of the imperial eagles by the fiendish Bolsheviks that is usually seen on Imperial rifles that remained or fell into Communist hands.

Production figures for dragoon rifles in 1896 are given as 79,412 but if these figures are correct (and with Mosin production numbers there is always some doubt as to this) very few seem to have survived the passing of almost 120 years and countless wars large and small across Europe that these were involved in.

The first thing one immediately notices is that it does not have the traditional "half-octagonal" (so-called "hex") receiver found on Mosin rifles from this period. This might lead one to believe that this is a rifle built up using a salvaged earlier barrel on a recycled later receiver, as was sometimes done by the Finns and occasionally by the Russians (although the Soviets generally used new production barrels on earlier receivers when they did this), but this is not the case. The Imperial Russian Romanov eagle remains somewhat intact and visible on the front top of the receiver ring, with enough of a flat spot on top the back of the receiver ring to tell that this was indeed an imperial era half-octagon receiver when originally made. Further, the receiver tang still has the intact and visible Izhevsk marking with 1896 date. This is also not "Bubba's" work - it is very well done and the old patina'ed bluing on the receiver matches the rest of the rifle. Why and when this receiver was modified to match the configuration of the 1936 and later round receivers is, and will remain, a mystery. My guess is that it was something done by the Finns, perhaps to remove some kind of serious external damage and it looked better to just round the whole thing off than grind down part of it. We know from other rifles that moderate external pitting alone did not bother the Finns - they just cleaned it up some and blued right over it. There is some light pitting visible on the sides of the receiver just at the wood line, which adds to my belief that there was some heavier pitting - perhaps deep "blood pitting" - on the receiver, the removal of which was done by rounding the receiver off.

The bolt is the correct type with the rounded boss or "collar" where the handle attaches to the bolt body and has the proper period Izhevsk bow and arrow marking, but the Finn added serial number on it does not match the rifle. The buttplate and magazine floorplate are un-numbered - the magazine assembly is all Izhevsk bow and arrow marked. The buttplate doesn't have a visible arsenal mark, but above the bottom screw it does have 3 over G stamped on it.

The stock is a nice early dragoon stock with visible light remains of the early style original Imperial arsenal cartouche with a very light outline of a WW1 German "DEUTSCHES REICH" eagle to the right of it. It doesn't show up very well in the photos, so I will try to take more later today when the lighting is a little different, as this sometimes helps. It also has an interesting ". or small o" over A marking on top of the comb by the buttplate - I used to know the significance of this marking, but I'm suffering a little memory failure right now....it's either WW1 German or Finn - perhaps it will come back to me later. The handguard is the late "Type 3" dragoon handguard with the brass endcaps and brass rivets that was adopted in the mid 1920's.

The cleaning rod is the correct early style with the large round head. As is sometimes seen on very early Mosin cleaning rods, it is serial numbered and has the number 27 stamped it down by the threaded end. The rifle's serial number is 190327, so the cleaning rod is exactly 10 numbers off from matching the rifle.

The rear barrel band is the correct original early dragoon "solid milled" one piece version with the Izhevsk bow and arrow marking, and the front band is the successor "button band" that was used for a couple years in the very early 1930's and has the Izhevsk "arrow in triangle" marking adopted in the late 1920's. The barrel band springs are the correct milled versions, with Izhevsk markings - bow and arrow on the rear and arrow/triangle on the front, which matches the barrel bands also. The fore-end tip cap is the correct early milled style, with Izhevsk bow and arrow marking.

The rear sight has been upgraded from the early flat style to the Konovalov type, and the original Russian "arshin" range markings on the left side of the base have been ground off and Finn metric markings added to the right.

The sling is an early long, black leather, rectangular buckle, M91 style. It is [SA] marked on the back, and the slit for the original mushroom head stud button can still be seen in front of the later added copper and steel rivets. The "dog collar" sling straps are early sewn style.

[Marcus]

Some more photos.

I might add that the bayonet shown with the rifle in the above photos is the correct early lock-ring bayonet used with the M91 Infantry, dragoon, and Cossack rifles.

[martin08]

Surely is an oddball, Marcus. This is the only time I have ever seen a hex that was machined to round.

[Marcus]

I've seen a few where Bubba crudely tried to grind and file a semi-octagon receiver round for one of his "you got a pretty mouth" deer rifle projects - those abortions are horrible and very obvious.

This one is very well done and very even - not even any of the unevenness or grind marks to the barrel shank that you see with semi-octagon receiver PE top-mount "ex"-snipers where the Soviets ground the welds flat and took the front of the side receiver flats down to the level of the barrel shank.

[MarksmanTim]

Wow. Thanks for sharing the photos and information. I haven't seen a "hex" receiver milled into a round receiver before.

[Gsragtop]

Wow, that one has been there done that.. I sure hope you are keeping some of your collection as corner stones to your future collecting (don't say you not gonna collect again, that's just not possible). This one seems to be one of those corner stone pieces. Thank you is much for sharing it !!

[Rongo]

A very odd rifle & very interesting. Is there a tang marking of any kind on that receiver? I would surmise another possibility was for them to put a newer receiver on & re-blue the new configuration together.... A lot less labor intensive than machining down a Hex receiver.

Either way, I still find this to be an interesting & impressive piece.

[redspoon]

Marcus that is one outstanding dragoon, I would be hard pressed to let that one go

Is there a tang marking of any kind on that receiver?

Further, the receiver tang still has the intact and visible Izhevsk marking with 1896 date.

Rongo I was thinking the same thing, sure does seem labor intensive when they could have just screwed on a newer receiver. I think that what's makes this rifle special, there couldn't have been to many of these done that way.

[qz2026]

Amazing. First one of these I have ever seen. Very cool.

[Judi and her Mosins]

Wow, Super first time I ever seen one. Great find Thanks for sharing them pictures. Judi and her Mosin's

[Marcus]

I took some more photos today. Note the moderate pitting on the barrel and receiver under the wood - I think this might have extended up onto the receiver (but oddly not the barrel shank, as the markings are clear and intact) and was the reason the receiver was milled down to round configuration....that or maybe some rifle fashion Finn just wanted his old dragoon to look like the latest Soviet round receiver 91/30?

There is a little moderate + pitting on the very front of the magazine body also.

I also got a couple shots that show the 1896 date and Izhevsk arsenal "bow and arrow" marking on the tang, showing that this is the rifle's original receiver.

The barrel channel in the stock was also hogged out pretty good (I've seen this before, but not this deep) - notice that you can see the pin for the barrel band spring and a hole into the front sling slot. There is a double shim under the front of the receiver and the rifle sits in the stock real well though. I've never fired the rifle - worried about what I would do if the stock cracked at the tang like they often do - so I can't comment on how any of this affects accuracy.

[Marcus]

The rest of the photos.

[MarksmanTim]

Good pics. I wouldn't want to shoot it for risk of cracking the forestock even! Looks like it could be thin from the channel being cut out so much. Interesting rifle for sure.

[JoeR]

Wow, Super first time I ever seen one. Great find Thanks for sharing them pictures. Judi and her Mosin's

X 2

[bunkysdad]

This may be the most interesting rifle I have ever seen, at least in recent memory. I think you may be onto something about the maching being done to take away the pitting. The receiver pitting, what little there is looks like the edges have been machined, and the pitting under the woodline does not look the same, so yes, very much a mystery. I would not see myself selling such a mystery in this lifetime.

[neal45]

I agree on the most interesting rifle statement by bunkysdad. This has been a very interesting thread and thanks for posting.

[TulaTom]

Thanks for sharing, Marcus. Very interesting rifle you have there.

[clayshooter2]

Wow! That is truly a head scratcher Marcus. Thanks for sharing.

[fintowin]

That is really cool. Like others have said, i'm not sure this would be one to sell. How would you ever replace it?

[Marcus]

If anyone is interested, I've listed it for sale on the Market Place forum here for $550 + shipping. It comes with everything shown in the photos including the bayonet.