System Nimrod

[yamoon]

I was browsing Alte Scheibenwaffen Vol II and came across System Nimrod. I have had a stalking rifle for 25 or so years I have never identified Frank de Hass called it "another German falling block". I now believe it to be a System Nimrod. I have never fired it as I do not have a suitable mold. The rifle is mechanically very good with strong rifling. Attached are some photos, do you agree it is a system Nimrod?
Thanks Mike

[mike ford]

Mike, Hopefully Axel will come into the conversation, he and Dick Hummel had a long running conversation about these rifles in WAIDMANNSHEIL and he can provide authoritative answers. In the meantime, I can see the bore( not groove or bullet) diameter is 172,28 as expressed in gauge measurement. This is a diameter often found in various 8 mm rifles. If you have not determined the nominal cartridge the rifle is intended for, I would suggest you check 8.15x46R first. You didn't show the rear sight( if any), but the front sight is adjustable for windage, giving the fair impression that the rifle is intended for shooting targets. This drives my conclusion that 8.15x46R is the most likely cartridge, but there are other possibilities as well. If you haven't already determined the cartridge, a proper chamber cast may be necessary to do so. If you haven't already determined it, the meaning of the other marks as are follows: The crown B shows a single definitive proof, using the provisional proof charge. The crown G means it was proofed to fire a single projectile ( bullet); and the crown U shows it underwent a view proof , which is a detailed inspection after the definitive proof, including verification of dimensions. The 7.06 means it was proofed in July of 1906. The 1289 is the ledger number of the proof. Since the Suhl Proof House didn't show ledger numbers, your rifle was proofed at the Zella-Mehlis Proof House. I am curious about one of the photos you provided. The photo of the breech block seems to possibly have a screw in the bottom of the assembly, which limits the final forward position of the hammer, after firing. Many years ago I bought a similar rifle that unfortunately had been converted to .218 Mashburn and scoped. It was very bad about "blowing"( actually piercing) primers, which I traced to lack of knowledge of the purpose of this screw( together with original firing pin being intended for low pressure 8.15x46R). To correct the problem, I had to make 3 firing pins and 2 bushings, and still had to enlist Felix Custom Guns to finally correct it. I looked at the photos and drawings of the rifles discussed by Axel and Dick and didn't observe such a screw. If your rifle has such a screw, I will be even more interested in Axel's comments.
Mike

[yamoon]

Mike
Thanks for the information. The screw seems to be below the main spring, perhaps to regulate tension. I neglected to mention that indeed it is 8.15x46r. It has a cocking indicator, a spring loaded pin that bears on the sear. There is a single rectangular hole approximately .375 x .100 in the upper tang, undoubtedly for a tang sight as it has screw from the side to lock it in place. The front sight is dovetailed into the barrel and has one small screw. The block has a piece dovetailed into the face and a piece dovetailed into the rear. I will post more photos. I am having a problem getting an accurate measurement from the lead bullet I used to slug the bore. The bore has 6 very narrow lands & wide grooves. Would you be able to convert the gage measurement to thousands of an inch?.
Thanks
Mike

[yamoon]

More photos, the small screw in the rear sight is an elevation adjustment.
Mike

[mike ford]

Mike,
The screw in mine works the same as yours. It should be adjusted so the firing pin comes back to be flush with the face of the breach block. I believe mine had been adjusted so it was "proud" of the breach face, consequently breaking, having to be replaced. When I got it, it had a different pin set into the hammer and was still adjusted "proud" of the face. Conversely, if it is adjusted to be less than flush, it may "blow" primers. The two rifles seem to be the same system, but built up by different workmen, as evidenced by different non critical details. The 172.28 gauge measurement equates to 7.62 mm which is .300". This doesn't mean the bore is precisely .300", it means a .300" gage pin entered the bore, but the next size( 156.14/ 7.87mm/ .310") would not enter. The dimension you need is the groove rather than the bore diameter. Barrels with an uneven number of grooves are a challenge to measure, but since yours has 6 grooves, they would be show up directly across from each other on a lead slug driven into the barrel. It should be fairly easy, then, to "mic" the diameter. If you don't have a micrometer, a common dial caliper will work also. Now, I too am interested in what Axel has to say about about this system, hopefully he will chime in soon.
Mike

[Axel E]

The easy part first: F.A. Luban was a local gunshop in Quedlinburg, noth of the Hercynians. He was once mentioned in 1894. That’s all I have on him.
Now to your falling block rifle: all the literature on these is full of errors and misconceptions, “Alte Scheibenwaffen” too. Often a “model” is named after a single specimen with that name on the barrel. As you noted, your rifle was proofed in Zella – Mehlis. The Nimrod Gewehrfabrik Thieme & Schlegelmilch was a Suhl company instead. This is common, as all the name Suhl gunmakers bought in their single shot target rifles from the Z-M guntrade in various states of completion and sold them as their own with widely variations of model designations. Most of these rifles were bought through Venus – Waffenwerke Oscar Will, Zella – Mehlis. But Will was not a big factory. Instead he procured rough forgings and barrels from the local forge and had them worked on by many outworking action filers. Many details changed over the years and the shape of action body and underlever was open to the whims of the customer to fit any house style or just to make the guns look different. All the fine differences that came over the years and now lead to a lot of headscratching are merely nitpicking in hindsight.
Will had protected this basic design with the breechblock hinged on the underlever by a DRGM in 1903. But a DRGM expired after six years at most and the design was in the public domain in 1909. Before 1900 there was a System Nimrod, but not the one shown in AS2. Instead, according to Maretsch’s description, that one was similar to the System Kolbe with a breechblock an integral part of the underlever. Later, Thieme & Schlegelmilch simply bought in the rifles though Will and advertised them as System Nimrod. Will himself used the names Venus and Ideal for the short and long actions. Stukenbrok advertised them as Modell Aste, Stukenbrok 1908 and 1911 . Catterfeld and Heller, both Z-M, as well as Martin in Mansfeld offered such rifles, bought in from the competitors or made by themselves. Udo Anschuetz also made such rifles, for Will and others.

[yamoon]

Thanks for the information Axel. I didn’t speak or read German, so must rely on a limited number of publications and get misleading information at times.
I always appreciate your knowledge
Mike