Czech M1891/38
1902 Izhevsk
s/n 10661
100% Izhevsk - all parts look to be pre-1928 Izhevsk with exception of bolt.
Imported by C.A.I. ST. ALB. VT.
Bore quality - Very good to excellent
Stock quality - very good to excellent
Crossbolt - Steel
Overall Quality - very good to excellent. A stunning rifle.
Markings
- Circle "T" - Czech rework stamp
- Czech star on barrel shank
- Circle "П" Provisional Black Power Test
- Circle "К" Proof of Aim
- "ПК" on receiver and barrel under crests - "Probaya Komissiya" (Proof Commission)
- Another stamping I can't reproduce at the top of the receiver - arsenal
stamping but on most M91/38's - Like a two piece wide arrow.
- The digit "7" adjacent to the Izhevsk arsenal stamping - unknown
- The Letter "К" on the right receiver wall.
- The letter "P" on the left receiver wall - unknown
- Letter "L" stamped on the top right rear of trigger guard.
- Letter "К" stamped on the top left rear of the trigger guard.
- A myriad of inspection stampings below the wood line
- Czech box/number stampings on the top of butt stock adjacent to butt plate
- The number "16" deeply stamped under the top of the butt plate
- A "3" with an "и" below it just above the vertical butt plate screw hole.
- C.A.I. importer's serial number stamped on left side of receiver
- C.A.I. import markings beneath the muzzle
Interesting Observations
- Has a pinned trigger that requires pin removal to remove the sear.
- Type 2 Interrupter/Ejector
- Bolt is a late model bolt. All stampings are post 1928.
- Milled barrel band retainer springs
- One "plum" barrel band
- "Plum" cleaning rod
Discussion Section
History and Speculation
The Czech M1891/38 is, to me, a very interesting and collectable carbine. As the name implies - "M1891 rifle in an M-38 style stock, hence M1891/38". The story goes that at the end of the cold war two DDR guards were intercepted with previously unknown carbines. When questioned, they indicated that the rifle was made in Czechoslovakia. This begs the question - Was this a Russian issue to DDR or something else since at the time, this particular rifle was not in anyone's database on Russian rifles. As time went on some research has come to light on these carbines. It is common knowledge that after hostilities ended in WWII, the Russians began an intensive program to refurbish their inventory of rifles. They were then put in storage for when the Western Hoard would invade the Motherland which, fortunately, never happened. The Czech's, however, having really no resources to draw from with the full knowledge that they needed armaments began a program to build new rifles from their inventory of captured and purchased Russian Mosin's, primarily M-91's including the M-91 Dragoons and Cossacks. Although Czechoslovakia was devastated financially and unable to manufacture many new weapons to defend their country, they have proved to be very frugal and innovative much like the Finns but with much less in the way of resources to draw from other than captured or purchased Russian long arms. And, much like the Finn's, the Czech quality put into these rifles was very high even though these rifles were a mish-mash of parts, stocks and actions.
When I say this, the vast majority of actions used were from Imperial Russian origins. Stocks were a mixture of the new M-44 stocks (including unissued Czech stocks), some M-38 stocks, and original cut down M-91 stocks. Except in rare cases barrel/receiver groups were primarily inventory from Imperial Russian rifles manufactured in Tula and Izhevsk. There are rare examples from Sestoryetsk and Chatellerault as well. There is even speculation that there could be Remington and Westinghouse examples, at least they are listed in the rarity list. There are those who believe that even some M91/30's were used but that is uncommon and I, for one, have never even seen a picture of one. I would be more than interested to seeing one of these. So, why would the Czech's remanufacture carbines and for what purpose?
We, as Mosin owners, love to speculate and with relatively little absolutely known about the different variants, speculation becomes rampant. I am no different from anyone else. We do our homework but that never seems to be enough. When boiled down, I believe there are two primary reasons for the creation of the M1891/38. One idea is that the Czech's wanted to bolster their inventory of rifles since much of the weaponry they used was lost, destroyed or generally unusable. This makes some sense but again begs the question of why carbines and why bolt action rifles when the trend was now semi-automatic and fully automatic infantry rifles? Secondly and more likely, these rifles could very well have been produced to sell on the open market to generate revenues. Although it is generally understood that Russia provided a large number of rifles to DDR there is no documentation that I am aware of that indicates that M1891/38's were part of that issue. It could be that these carbines were sold to Russia and eventually made their way to DDR or they were directly sold to DDR from the Czech's. I don't think anyone knows for sure on this one. But there were certainly countries where these rifles could be sold. The quantities manufactured is also unknown but from the low numbers of these rifles in circulation, I suspect the number was low and that could stem from the idea that much of their inventory used to build these rifle was not salvageable.
Indeed, I would suggest that the "carbine" decision came from their inventory of badly maintained rifles with virtually destroyed and corroded muzzles. The Russians would simply counterbore and recrown these rifles and when necessary replace the barrels all together. The Czech's being more realistic for financial reasons likely came to the decision that in many cases simply cutting down the barrel would leave salvageable and in many cases, high quality barrels to go with the Russian's virtually indestructible and high quality receiver. And, I also believe that their choice of stocks fell into that same line of thinking. In general, I feel that the Czech's used up what they had before either manufacturing new stocks or purchasing new stocks from Russia or other European countries that were now producing M-44's after receiving Russian tooling. An interesting side note is that this rifle appears to have been initially designed to sport a retractable bayonet similar or exactly like those being installed on M-44's. You see these rifles released in M-91 stocks that have had the bayonet groove milled into them. And many were released in M-44 stocks. I have seen examples of an M1891/38 with the retractable bayonet so we know they not only made them but sold/issued them with bayonets intact. At some point the decision was made to discontinue the addition of a bayonet. There is a school of thought that insists that all M91/38's had had a bayonet installed. After the decision was made to issue these rifles without bayonets, all the bayonets were removed including the mounting ring. There is some evidence to support this in that careful examination or the mounting area reveals in many cases, an irregularity that could have been the remnants of a removed ring. I agree that many of these rifles had the bayonet mounting hardware removed, but find it difficult to grasp that a large number of these were installed and subsequently removed, if for no other reason than the expense of such a change. Hence my thought that this was done early on and the resulting rework was not performed over a huge number of rifles. Regardless, I sense this was again a cost issue and something that most countries (other than Russia who was addicted to bayonets) would not think desirable or needed. Additionally, this rifle would not likely go into service as a front line weapon - more for rear area police or guard work, although there are many examples of M-44's used in developing and third world countries in addition to reports of a small number of M91/59's and M91/38's being used in Vietnam. The target market was relatively small and specialized but so was the inventory for sale. This rifle has no evidence of ever having bayonet hardware installed but I have other's that clearly appear to have had bayonet mounting hardware which was removed.
It is also apparent to me that the Czech's significantly reworked many of these stocks, especially the M-91 stocks. I have no question that they were cut down, sanded, repairs done if required, and refinished. I even believe that the wrists of these M-91's were sculpted thinner to where the rifle almost looks delicate as compared to the more bulky M-44 or even M-38 stocks. Why they did this is unknown but it was probably to remove damage and discolored areas of the wrist that absorbed all sorts of contaminants from the soldiers hands that creates deep stains in the wood from the tang about half way down the wrist.
I've got a theory about these stocks after doing some research. First, it really appears as if the stock on this rifle, not rifle but stock, since there is nothing that would indicate to me that the stock and rifle might have been originally married, did have some Austrian experience. I think the small plugged holes on the forestock and butt stock might indicate that. Perhaps a wire hanger in the front "rope holes" and an Austrian swivel in the rear. Additionally, after looking at earlier M95 swivels, there could have been one of those tried as well. Those swivels appear to have the same size base as my large plugged/repaired area, that required two screws and would probably have been inletted slightly for fit. That's just an idea since I have never seen a Mosin retrofitted with these large rear sling hangers. It is certainly possible that the stock was gouged or damaged significantly enough to require a plug to be fitted. Overall, however, the appearance of the smaller plugged holes really smack of some sort of Austrian experience, at least a good conversation starter to encourage yet more speculation. There are no verifiable stamping on the receiver to indicate that the rifle was used by the Austro-Hungarians as was the case with MillerTymes 1900 Tula showcase rifle but, as said, I don't feel that this rifle and stock were original to each other.
My research also indicates that a large number of these rifles were set in and designed for M-44 stocks. I have seen a few pictures of these rifles but have never actually put my hands on one. This stock has pre-war original M-91 type of escutcheons. From examples that I have seen (http://7.62x54r.net/MosinID/MosinRef01.htm and others), the M91/38's referenced certainly appear to be stocked in true M-44 stocks which include wartime and post war sling slots and escutcheons. My theory all along has been that the Czech's, being extraordinarily frugal, first used the older M-91/Dragoon/Cossack stocks that housed the imperial rifles that were cut down. They, likewise, cut down the forestock close to the sling slot, milled in a nose cap support, cut in a new sling slot and reused the escutcheon from the piece they cut off. Thus the front and rear escutcheons matched. In some cases, as with this rifle, they milled in finger grooves near the rear band, probably milling in the bayonet groove at the same time. The finger slots look hastily made as, perhaps, an after thought. Sometimes and I suspect with the earlier M91/38's, they also milled in the bayonet groove but did not mill the finger grooves in. Why, is anyone's guess. About half of the examples of pre war stocked M91/30's I have include these finger groves although I can't attest that they were original to the rifle or were milled during fabrication or arsenal rework at a later date. I can't find any reference to when the Russians began milling these finger groves or when the Czech's began for that matter. This was probably something that began in the mid 1930's and became standard with the advent and subsequent maturation of the M91/30 but certainly not done when the Imperial and later M-91's were manufactured - it would not have made sense to do so with the M-91 barrel band configuration.
That's all I know about this rifle and the M91/38. I suspect I will get some feedback on my theories and that's good. All I try to do is understand the "why and how" with these rifles when research doesn't answer my questions. Overall the M91/38 was not originally considered a collector's piece since much was not known about them including how many were made. We still don't know the answer to that question but, undoubtedly production was relatively low - some estimate around 50,000. My gut tells me it could have been lower. I have read speculations that the M91/38 would likely have value close to or the same as the M91/59 but I think that speculation was a bit incorrect. This rifle is relatively rare and to me and many others highly desirable. It checks off multiples of my "cool" factors that you would generally buy entire rifles to get just one - but here all in one neat little package. Imperial rifle from virtually any armory that made Russian Mosins, great bore, carbine, wonderful history, virtually unlimited configurations (stocks, matching/nonmatching, parts...) and superb Czech quality and workmanship all in one.
Something tells me that I may have posted this rifle at one time but I couldn't find it. I have posted snippets of it in other posts however. If so, this is simply an update with much more detail and rampant speculation - logical but rampant none-the-less. Enjoy. This is a magnificent rifle. Who knows... I may have a few more to post
.Discussion Section