View Single Post
Old May 15, 2022, 06:09 PM   #2
44 AMP
Join Date: March 11, 2006
Location: Upper US
Posts: 25,557
though I sold it some time ago, for many years I had a commercial Bolo model (1920s vintage) which had the stock cut. This gun had also been refinished nd converted to 9mm Luger.

The Wooden stock/holster was a standard accessory for all the slotted Broomhandles, and has NO markings. None on the wood, none on the metal. Any standard Broomhandle will fit inside one. The complete stock set also has a leather "hanger" that can attach to a belt or sling which the stock fastens to (straps) and slots for the cleaning rod sections.

They were not numbered to the guns, none I have seen, including the one I had , had any visible markings. I'm sure they were sold as accessories /replacements if your C96 didn't come with one.

And, there are also "aftermarket" reproduction stock/holsters as well.

The ATF has been very "on again, off again" about pistol stocks over the years and has changed what is officially "legal" (without a tax stamp) at least 3 different times that I know of.

The last change they did before I stopped following the subject (and getting rid of my stock) was that stocked "curio & relic" guns were legal with no stamp, only if the stock was "original period" correct. Prior to that, they had been legal no stamp if the stock was original or a reproduction.

And before that it was mostly gun + stock wasn't legal unless it had the stamp. Many guns, particularly Lugers owners had the stock lug ground off, so a stock could not be attached, and so they could legally have both without the tax stamp. Pity, but that's what people did....

The really risky thing about the stocks, and the regulations is that since they aren't marked, how does one proove...anything about them, really??

Appearnce isn't PROOF. Sure, a 1920s or earlier stock would be expected to show some wear, but lack of that is proof of nothing, other than it was well cared for.

As I understood it (and I'm not a lawyer) the change where the ATF says only period stocks are exempt would mean that for my 1920s era gun, a stock made in the 20s (or earlier) would be allowed but a reproduction made in the 50s or the 70s would NOT be. So, in order to avoid the remote possibility of wrongdoing, I sold th stock to a collector, and some years later, sold the pistol to someone else.

My gun was in 9mm Luger and was without question the most miserable 9mm to shoot I've ever found. Without gloves, it HURT, due the small grips, the odd shape, and mostly the stock attachment cutout.

With the stock attached, it was very pleasant to shoot, though wobbly....

The C96 is an important step in the evolution of firearms design, but like the Luger, and some others, was an evolutionary dead end.

think of them like the fin back dinosaurs of the Triassic period, a new step in evolution, and dominating for an age, but going extinct as better designs appeared in the Jurassic age.

My guess would be that some previous owner bought/already had a C96 stock/holster and paired it up with the gun you've got.

BTW, the Chinese made them, too....
All else being equal (and it almost never is) bigger bullets tend to work better.
44 AMP is offline  
Page generated in 0.02932 seconds with 8 queries