Finn M39 1960s/70s?

[Capybara]

Hi all:

I am from California and here, we may not purchase mail order C&R long guns that aren't at least 50 years old, regardless of their C&R status, unlike the rest of the country. I want to buy a Finn M39 "None" with either a 1967 or 68 date stamped receiver. Were these rifles actually manufactured in the late 1960s or were they just re-arsenaled much older rifles with older tang dates and the receiver was just stamped 1960s? I don't want run afoul of the California's ridiculous law here, anyone have any advice? Are these rifles older than 50 years old?

[zeebill]

These rifles were all built on older receivers which are stamped on the tang if at all. The date you see stamped on the top part is on the barrel not the receiver and represents the assembly date. These were made for the Finnish army to use in training and marksmanship programs. Many saw little or no use and if you find the right one can look totally unused or issued. They like all rifles these days are getting pricey at around $200 to $400 or more. When you say None I will presume you mean No Maker and just dated rifle. You have my condolences for living in California and I have only one comment on that, it being move! Good Luck finding what you are looking for as they are rare to find, and the one source of them is not welcomed by me. Bill

[Bugelson]

These were made for the Finnish army to use in training and marksmanship programs.

Bill, I really don't think that's the case with those rifles. It is widely assumed 'fact" withouth proof I should think...

[Capybara]

Will post images of the rifle when it arrives. Thanks for verification of the tang date. Yes, I know they are rare, that's why I wanted to jump on this one. Unfortunately most of my work is based out of Hollywood, my wife is a teacher tied to her local school districts pension, which she will lose a large part of if we move and my son just started as a HS freshman. So until I can figure out how to make a living doing something else and make enough money to tell my wife that her pension probably won't be there and will traded away by the corrupt teacher's union (Mafia) and until my son graduates and goes to college, I am stuck.

[TopperT]

I would simply inquire of a seller, "what is the tang date?" and if it is PRIOR to 1966 buy it . There are some M39's with NO tang date. Stay away from them. Most of mine are dated PRIOR to 1936 as they ALL have "hex' receivers (Russians changed to round 'about then'). You can find wonderful M39's with Cali-legal tang dates and many with dates prior to 1899.

[desdem12]

I would think that ANY m39 would have a date at least 1952 or under. And most way before 1952 if any exist after the WWII date. Russia and finland didn't trade stuff freely so what ever they had was bought or captured.

[zeebill]

These were made for the Finnish army to use in training and marksmanship programs.

Bill, I really don't think that's the case with those rifles. It is widely assumed 'fact" withouth proof I should think...

OK I am pretty sure they had newer and more modern weapons when these were assembled right? What then were these used as?


Topper why on earth are you staying away from M39's without tang dates?

The date on the barrel is when it was made or the rifle assembled and is on top and in sight. The tang date is on the bottom of the tang and is not visible unless the rifle is taken apart. All M39's were made with older receivers as the Finns never made receivers. For ATF purposes in this country the date of the receiver which is not visible from the outside is often taken as the date on the barrel which is visible. I had to argue like a madman with a new member of the ATF team at Pikesville, Maryland guns show one time about this. She was brand new and out of college and knew not what she was talking about which is often the case with younger ATF agents. Finally I sent an old dealer over to her that collected Finns and he and an older agent straightened her out. She did apologize to me and I give her credit for that.


I have never seen a date after the early 1940s on an M39 and it was a round receiver the one I did see. Most of them are made on hex receivers which will make them all before 1936 or 1935.Another thing about scrubbed tangs or tangs with no marks on the bottom you have to consider M39's made on Chatellerault. Westinghouse, and Remington receivers which may have small marks or be on the top of the tang without a date. Another thing is the tangs were scrubbed to make the action of the rifle sit at a muzzle up attitude to kind of crudely float the barrel I believe. This is just an Hypothesist of mine but unless anyone else comes up with a better idea I will stick to it. Further supporting this I note most barrels on the muzzle end of M39's show a wear pattern from rubbing on the wood, to me they were loose in the wood and raised to float them. Bill

[Bugelson]

OK I am pretty sure they had newer and more modern weapons when these were assembled right? What then were these used as?

Sure there was modern weapons too but not enough as Finnish army was piss poor during those days and arming the whole reserve would not have been easy. Heck, the rear echelon guys were to be armed with m/91s and m/39s etc. in the late '80s if there would have been SHF-situation.

I think the depots just had idle parts to put the rifles together. And maybe the political atmosphere in Europe was helping the decision a little...

Many, well the vast majority, of those late m/39s are totally unissued...from depots to storage I say. The rifles never saw any "action" in the FDF.

[TopperT]

SORRY: My mention of non-dated was for the OP. If Cali wanted proof that the receiver was PRE a date.....it would be better to have an actual tang date. That's all I ment. I have one "no-date" tanged M39. I just would not sell it to a buyer in Cali.

[Junk Yard Dog]

OK I am pretty sure they had newer and more modern weapons when these were assembled right? What then were these used as?

Sure there was modern weapons too but not enough as Finnish army was piss poor during those days and arming the whole reserve would not have been easy. Heck, the rear echelon guys were to be armed with m/91s and m/39s etc. in the late '80s if there would have been SHF-situation.

I think the depots just had idle parts to put the rifles together. And maybe the political atmosphere in Europe was helping the decision a little...

Many, well the vast majority, of those late m/39s are totally unissued...from depots to storage I say. The rifles never saw any "action" in the FDF.

While all of my late date M39's are issued, none show signs of extensive field use. What they do have in common is sand, trapped under the wood, a lot of sand. I use similar sand in the sandbags I use to support the rifle on my own range. During firing sand seeps out a little bit and dusts the rifles. I am assuming that the same thing was happening with these rifles, range time, and a lot of it. I have only seen this in my 1967-68-69, and 70 dated M39's, other rifles may have pine needles, or dirt, but no sand.

[Bugelson]

Hmmm...I wonder if we'll never know the truth behind those rifles, I mean with sources black on white...

I wonder where the idea of them being especially marksmanship trainers came from? I'm not buing it but If we could catch the story origin we'd probably get somewhere.

That I know that all m/39s ( be it war time or late) were strictly in range use back in those days. M/91s served as "field trainers" and with those m/91s they only shot blanks.

[Capybara]

As soon as it arrives, my first job will be to break it down and inspect the tang date and to look for mother nature's bounty (leaves, sand, dirt, pine needles) under the receiver. Even if the tang is not dated, there are numerous sources and records that show when hex receiver manufacturing ceased so I feel pretty confident that I would be fine under ATF or CADOJ scrutiny. Looking forward to my first Finn. I think I am only going to shoot my Prvi brass and my reloads through it, not sure if I will want to expose it to the corrosive ammo I shoot. I want this rifle to stay in great condition and will probably baby it as I have lots of beater, Bubba M44s I can shoot all of the time and not worry about the odd dent or scratch on.

[qz2026]

If I lived in California, which I NEVER will, I would make sure the tang date of older than 50 years old. That's 1973 if my subtraction is correct. I don't know of any Mosin's newer than that. I'm not sure if that is only for C&R's or not. In general (but nothing is written in granite with these rifles), any round receiver rifle will have the same receiver date as the barrel. Hex receivers are different. You could have a 1929 Izhevsk barrel and an 1897 receiver making it an antique. From a Federal Perspective, no license is needed to transfer such a rifle. I don't know about California. I am sure that the date of the receiver indicates the date of the weapon. You need a license to buy a Mosin receiver but not a Mosin barrel. But, who knows how the 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals would rule or any liberal court in California. The odds are likely against you. The question is, can a C&R or even a non C&R sell a Mosin to a California dealer? Can that dealer transfer that weapon to you? Would that weapon, therefore, be legal to own?

Dolk would probably be the resident expert on California laws.

[zeebill]

I have only one dated rifle from 1969 that I know for sure (like the way I said that?) looks to be unissued. Everything else in those years has dents and wear on them. I in all truth got most of my 39's so many years ago I can not recall whether they had sand in them. Most of them recently came from other collectors who had already went through them before I got them. I still am in a quest for a round receiver M39 without luck. I have looked at quite a few of them and passed on them for many reasons including being dead broke! That one hurt the worst! What the hay it happens to most of us. I am starting to get to the point where I will almost go 2 for 1 to get the round one. At 69 who knows how much time I have left to find it? Bill

[Capybara]

All it takes is money Bill. I know a guy in Arizona who has amassed a collection that any of us would be astounded by, he spent the past 25 years and collectively millions of dollars on. His examples are all pristine, look like new and are the rarest of the rare. I guess the challenge is can we come across an occasional Holy Grail on a middle class budget? I like to buy collectibles that I can shoot. Once a gun is worth more than $1,500.00, I wouldn't shoot it much or at all, all things considered. I scored my incoming M39 for well under $400.00 so it is ready to shoot and it will appreciate in value. Better investment than Gold, Silver or the stock market.

[jonnyboy091373]

The two 68 m39's I bought from burns had no sand, just black grease. They may have been used, but certianly not very much. I have a 42 that is my shooter, the other two are staying in storage. I only put 20 rounds through one, and the other is still in grease. The 67 I'm getting will be a shooter as well, but only because it had a previous owner. (See my post about that one, it has the funny sights, and the dark ring on the bolt face) you'll be happy with yours, and make sure to take lots of pictures for us also, watch ot for shims.

[zeebill]

[quote="jonnyboy091373"]The two 68 m39's I bought from burns had no sand, just black grease.

Ain't that black grease something? It is like Never-seize pipe compound a little bit goes a long way! I made the mistake of shooting one a long, long time ago without removing that grease it both hardens and flows out of the rifle when it gets hot. What a dummy I was and what a mess I made! Bill