Hi guys. I recently picked up a VZ24 1938. It has the Check lion crest and all the original BRNO marks. No other marks. The thing is mint condition, probably refurb. Matching numbers (electro pencil on bolt). Stock is as new. The question is, who refurbed these rifles? Some peole say it was the Russians but they would have scrubbed the crest. Other people say the Romanians refurbed them. I can't get an answer to this. Any ideas?
VZ24 question for the mauser guys
- Thread starter points
- Start date
Same thing, I've heard russians refurbed them. They didn't grind of german crests or codes.......
Also if new wood could be yugo or czech, the russians didn't really put on new wood.
What's the stock configuration? Take down disc or not?
Also if new wood could be yugo or czech, the russians didn't really put on new wood.
What's the stock configuration? Take down disc or not?
Not sure what a take down disc is. Is that the disc on theright side like a unit disc? It's there.
I believe when these came in they were advertised as being refurbed by the Russians. There were two versions commonly sold, those with crests and those with ground crests.
Personally, I have a bit of trouble believing the Russians did the refurb for a number of reasons but there are also arguments to support Russian involvement. I'll make my observations based on the example I own but there are going to be variations on these so what I see is not going to apply to all. If the Russians did refurb these, then based on my example, they held the standards of the rebuild to a much higher level than the K98k's they also did.
For the Russians: The bluing is identical on my VZ24 to what's on my RC K98k, the use of electropencil to "match" parts is similar (although this was used by several other countries as well), the mix of German and Czech parts, and the missing tg lock screws.
Against Russian refurbishment: Overall high quality of rebuild as compared to the K98k's they did. You see these with repairs to the handguard that are fairly well done, sight protectors and cleaning rods left in place, and old serial numbers ground off before refinishing. These are all things you don't commonly see on the RC K98k's. Care was also taken to stamp the stock serial in the same location as the original would have been. I at first thought mine was the original stock to the receiver but after looking at several other original VZ 24's the number font is incorrect so I think that my stock was force matched at the time of rebuild. It is as new like the op's stock.
Personally, I have a bit of trouble believing the Russians did the refurb for a number of reasons but there are also arguments to support Russian involvement. I'll make my observations based on the example I own but there are going to be variations on these so what I see is not going to apply to all. If the Russians did refurb these, then based on my example, they held the standards of the rebuild to a much higher level than the K98k's they also did.
For the Russians: The bluing is identical on my VZ24 to what's on my RC K98k, the use of electropencil to "match" parts is similar (although this was used by several other countries as well), the mix of German and Czech parts, and the missing tg lock screws.
Against Russian refurbishment: Overall high quality of rebuild as compared to the K98k's they did. You see these with repairs to the handguard that are fairly well done, sight protectors and cleaning rods left in place, and old serial numbers ground off before refinishing. These are all things you don't commonly see on the RC K98k's. Care was also taken to stamp the stock serial in the same location as the original would have been. I at first thought mine was the original stock to the receiver but after looking at several other original VZ 24's the number font is incorrect so I think that my stock was force matched at the time of rebuild. It is as new like the op's stock.
I tend to go along with jb in that the quality and type does not seem to match Russian rebuilds I have seen(I haven't seen that many) Why they would try to duplicate the original is a puzzel unless they were originally intended to be sold off to collectors does not make sence to me.
I could not argue either way and have seen this argument bantered about on various forums to no end.
I'll get a picture up later
I could not argue either way and have seen this argument bantered about on various forums to no end.
I'll get a picture up later
Czech and Romanian crests ground off would make me think it wasn`t done in either of those two countrys. But then again in later years both countries were under Russian influence. The quality is quite good of the work done, and some have new stocks. I`d love to know where it was done as well.
I'm personally of the opinion they came from one of the satellite states that refurbed them under Russian direction and guidance, but where the quality of workmanship was a bit better. It would also be in a country that had access to european walnut as the lying share of these have new post-war made stocks that closely match BRNO original production.
If I had to guess, I would say either Romania or the now-defunct Czechoslovakia.
If I had to guess, I would say either Romania or the now-defunct Czechoslovakia.
One thing that makes me question the possibility of the Czechs refurbing these is the difference in font on the stock serials. If they were redone by the Czechs, why don't they have the same font as the original serials would have? Maybe the original stamps were lost during WW2 under German control or something along those lines?
