Author Topic: Mitchell’s Mausers good bad or ugly  (Read 1767 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Bigboar

  • Trade Count: (1)
  • Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 315
  • Gender: Male
Mitchell’s Mausers good bad or ugly
« on: August 30, 2006, 07:29:59 AM »
Does anyone have any experience with the Mitchell’s Mausers K98/48?  K98\M48 Collector Grade Rifle $299.00

Bigboar

Offline Mikey

  • GBO Supporter
  • Moderator
  • Trade Count: (2)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8734
Re: Mitchell’s Mausers good bad or ugly
« Reply #1 on: August 30, 2006, 07:44:58 AM »
Seen, fondled and played with about 4 or 5 and they are good, solid, brand spankin' new manufacture M48/M48A versions of the K98 (the bolt is a bit shorter and not all parts interchange with the K98s).  The short barrelled versions are a buncha hooey - heavy on the recoil, really loud and you lose velocity from the short (18") barrel. 

What you get with a collector grade is a really nice lookin' one but understand these are the M48/48A rifles that have no historical value as a WWII Nazi Mauser if that is what you are looking for.

If you are looking for a solid, accurate, totally reliable hard hitting brush gun they are a good choice, except for the terrible Mauser sights; or as mil-spec to turn into a sporter but then you are starting out on the high dollar side and could easily do as well or better with a new commercial bolt gun and it would probably cost you less than the overall conversion costs it would ential to make it a really nice sporter.  JMHO.  Mikey.

Offline S.S.

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2840
Re: Mitchell’s Mausers good bad or ugly
« Reply #2 on: August 30, 2006, 10:47:30 AM »
VERY Overpriced!!!
And most of the Guns you see that are supposed to have
Been "Captured At Stalingrad" Or something like that
can not be historically proven that is where they actually came from.
Besides, Why would it make any difference? Don't get hooked by a Gimmick
that an importer has created.
Vir prudens non contra ventum mingit
"A wise man does not pee against the wind".

Offline Bigboar

  • Trade Count: (1)
  • Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 315
  • Gender: Male
Re: Mitchell’s Mausers good bad or ugly
« Reply #3 on: August 30, 2006, 11:27:43 AM »
VERY Overpriced!!!
And most of the Guns you see that are supposed to have
Been "Captured At Stalingrad" Or something like that
can not be historically proven that is where they actually came from.
Besides, Why would it make any difference? Don't get hooked by a Gimmick
that an importer has created.

Collector Grade Rifle $299.00 M48 99 is too high wow.  I think your talking about their museum pieces in the fitted case, OH my are they high.

bigbor


Offline Airsporter

  • Trade Count: (8)
  • A Real Regular
  • ****
  • Posts: 893
  • Gender: Male
Re: Mitchell’s Mausers good bad or ugly
« Reply #4 on: August 30, 2006, 11:43:43 PM »
I think the M48 is a good rifle.  I also believe the Mitchell's ad has a lot of hype in it - trying to build historical value and justify their price.  That said, if you want an "as new" version - they have it.  I bought a "shooter grade" M48A for $80 from AIM.  Works for me.

Offline Ambushhunter

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Avid Poster
  • **
  • Posts: 126
Re: Mitchell’s Mausers good bad or ugly
« Reply #5 on: August 31, 2006, 09:33:40 AM »
I gotta tell ya, I have NO experience with these mausers, but I saw one at the range last week and was not too impressed.  I've seen nicer looking ones at S.O.G and Aim surplus...much cheaper.  My Mosin M38 looks nicer and shoots good too!
NJCSD, ANJRPC, NRA
http://www.njcsd.org/

Offline S.S.

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2840
Re: Mitchell’s Mausers good bad or ugly
« Reply #6 on: August 31, 2006, 10:15:57 AM »
Collector Grade is their definition...
It is Hype... They are what they are..
Mass produced surplus military bolt action rifles...
Museum Grade is their definition also..
You pay $299.00 for it then try to resell it,
If you get $150.00 you will indeed be a fortunate man.
Kind of like putting a big down payment on a car,
It depreciates enough before you get it home
for that money to be gone...It's a used car then.
Pay it if you like but I'll bet you will be no happier with it
than one of the $140.00 versions. Won't shoot a
 bit better either I'll bet.


Vir prudens non contra ventum mingit
"A wise man does not pee against the wind".

Offline Bigboar

  • Trade Count: (1)
  • Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 315
  • Gender: Male
Re: Mitchell’s Mausers good bad or ugly
« Reply #7 on: August 31, 2006, 12:13:22 PM »
Collector Grade is their definition...
It is Hype... They are what they are..
Mass produced surplus military bolt action rifles...
Museum Grade is their definition also..
You pay $299.00 for it then try to resell it,
If you get $150.00 you will indeed be a fortunate man.
Kind of like putting a big down payment on a car,
It depreciates enough before you get it home
for that money to be gone...It's a used car then.
Pay it if you like but I'll bet you will be no happier with it
than one of the $140.00 versions. Won't shoot a
 bit better either I'll bet.



I haven't seen one to hold or shoot.  What I would love to find is a Polish Radom K98 that would be reasonable.  The stuff I see around me are rough at best.  I'll keep looking maybe a Sweed or Russian??

bigboar

Offline Ambushhunter

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Avid Poster
  • **
  • Posts: 126
Re: Mitchell’s Mausers good bad or ugly
« Reply #8 on: August 31, 2006, 01:48:31 PM »
I don't have any experience with the swedes, but I have to tell you.  I was pleasantly surprised with the russian M38.  This is the first mil-surp rifle I purchased and didn't know what to expect.  I ordered one with a laminated stock. Much to my surprise, after a little cleaning, it came up real nice.  One small crack in the butt that was repaired at the arsenal, noticable, but not bad at all (adds to character).  It was made in 1943.  I looked up all the arsenal marks and stamps on the internet.  I forget off hand where it was made and refurbished, but all were from russian arsenals.  It has all matching numbers.  Cycles perfectly and shoots pretty darn good too!!  I plan one buying a few more of varying types in the next year.  Good luck!!
NJCSD, ANJRPC, NRA
http://www.njcsd.org/

Offline S.S.

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2840
Re: Mitchell’s Mausers good bad or ugly
« Reply #9 on: September 01, 2006, 08:36:07 AM »
The Poles get a lot of ridicule, but they have made some
pretty nice weapons.
Vir prudens non contra ventum mingit
"A wise man does not pee against the wind".

Offline Bigboar

  • Trade Count: (1)
  • Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 315
  • Gender: Male
Re: Mitchell’s Mausers good bad or ugly
« Reply #10 on: September 02, 2006, 10:20:40 AM »
The Poles get a lot of ridicule, but they have made some
pretty nice weapons.
I built a target rifle with a Radom action in 257 Roberts and was able to keep up with the bib boys at the club.  An old timer was my spotter and said the the Poles' had some of the best steel.  All I knew was how smooth it was, wish I still had it.

bigboar

Offline Slamfire

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1028
Re: Mitchell’s Mausers good bad or ugly
« Reply #11 on: September 02, 2006, 05:52:31 PM »
They have all three, good, bad and ugly. You pays yore money and takes yore choice.  ;D
Bold talk from a one eyed fat man.

Offline kiddekop

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 280
Re: Mitchell’s Mausers good bad or ugly
« Reply #12 on: September 09, 2006, 01:00:44 PM »
My dealer has purchased bosnian m48 mausers from http://www.centuryarms.com for customers to convert came with turned down bolt  reasonably priced have to go thru your dealer for prices.s

Offline lgm270

  • Trade Count: (1)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1862
Re: Mitchell’s Mausers good bad or ugly
« Reply #13 on: October 02, 2006, 07:43:00 PM »
Petersen' Rifle Magazine has a review of the Mitchell tanker in .308  Win and gave it high marks.  Wayne Van Zwoll said it had good accuracy and low recoil.  He purchased the perforamce package which included a Timney trigger, an EER scope and a scope mount.  He said it was great. 

Offline prairiedog555

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 497
  • Gender: Male
Re: Mitchell’s Mausers good bad or ugly
« Reply #14 on: November 10, 2006, 12:07:18 PM »
I paid $109 for mine at interordinace, shotgun news ad.  It was filthy, full of crud, but not really banged up.  Had gunsmith put a Bold trigger on it for $70.  well worth the money.