For the Broomhandle fans

alvin · 07-18-2012, 12:02 AM

I could consider that Mauser, if it comes with matching stock. Back a few years ago, one man sold me a prewar small ring which came with matching stock but unfortunately the attaching iron was filed down so that wood box could be used as a holster, but not a stock. The stock wood had been re-varnished. The gun plus that crippled stock cost me $1500. I sold the stock for a couple of hundred bucks (?) and kept the gun for shooting. It performed well in range. Say, the cost of that naked gun was $1300, which is lower than $37.50 of 1953. The gun is same gun if it's not better than that good one described in the advertisement -- I bet it belongs to the better category in 1953 and had cost the previous owner something because the owner had had that gun for 50 years without shooting a single round from it.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Switch to Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Threaded Mode

07-18-2012, 12:02 AM	#6
alvin User Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: US Posts: 3,843 Thanks: 132 Thanked 729 Times in 438 Posts	I could consider that Mauser, if it comes with matching stock. Back a few years ago, one man sold me a prewar small ring which came with matching stock but unfortunately the attaching iron was filed down so that wood box could be used as a holster, but not a stock. The stock wood had been re-varnished. The gun plus that crippled stock cost me $1500. I sold the stock for a couple of hundred bucks (?) and kept the gun for shooting. It performed well in range. Say, the cost of that naked gun was $1300, which is lower than $37.50 of 1953. The gun is same gun if it's not better than that good one described in the advertisement -- I bet it belongs to the better category in 1953 and had cost the previous owner something because the owner had had that gun for 50 years without shooting a single round from it.