Gunboards Forums banner

New Sokolov Mount

9K views 58 replies 9 participants last post by  Kirby 
#1 ·
Just picked up this Sokolov Mount with the different pattern of controling the elevation and depression.

This example features a pin and three holes rather than the usual slot and clamping bolt.

Quite why it was produced and what possible advantages it could offer over the usual pattern is questionable.

The mount has the Tula mark and I would date it to the 1930's.

Any comments? Are there any examples in the states. They do appear fairly commonly in photographs if you loook.
 

Attachments

See less See more
2
#3 ·
Yes, there are mounts with this pattern gross elevation stop, some very new looking and others used lloing. Advantage is that it will not shake loose and accidentally alter the elevation! Plus simplified manufacture, etc as Max notes. Is there a serial with all numbers or combination Cyrillic characters and numbers?

Bob Naess
 
#4 ·
Bob

The only number is 73289 which if you assume the gun and mount were brought together at the same time dates it to 1931.

I was assuming 1930's production because it is all brass and the ends of the rails are squared off rather than the profiled pattern on later production.
The wheels are what I assume to be the late pattern so were probably fitted during a post-war rebuild. It lacks the casting web at the rear which would have given the date of manufactured.

This particular model forms only a very small precentage of the mounts aquired by Rytons so they could not have offered any appreciable advantage over the normal pattern or they would have been a lot more common.
 
#5 ·
Thanks for the update.

>This particular model forms only a very small precentage of the mounts aquired by Rytons so they could not have offered any appreciable advantage over the normal pattern or they would have been a lot more common.<

The proportionate number of any parts or accessories factory produced can't possibly be determined, or even remotely estimated or deduced by the proportionate numbers that might show up on the market. As with other model variations with the 1910s, unfortunately, there is no verifiable way to determine how many were made. The stores of retailers certainly don't mean anything in this regard, and again, the extremely small pool of examples available to us, out of the estimated 750,000 guns and mounts produced, makes it very difficult to draw conclusions. Many other MGs suffer from the same lack of historical accounting, too.
Personally, I can't imagine that the Russians would have made any effort to document any of the minor design changes that occured with their military equipment over the span of production. We're stuck with it.......

Bob Naess
 
#8 ·
Neil writes:

>I can obviously only comment on a random sample of mounts.<

We're all in the same boat with the extremely small sample to observe. Having read so many incorrect assessments, conclusions and speculations about all sorts of related matters in the MG books published over the years, the MG collecting and shooting community can put these to rest given the extensive hands-on experience as well as research interest and resources they bring to bear. What facts we can find are valuable and need cataloguing, and when conclusions can be drawn we all benefit.

Hopefuly you are cataloguing all the variations that you find with the guns, mounts and accessories, which will be a valuable resource for those interested in these guns. Maybe as time goes by, documents will surface about the details of the 1910 production, refurbishing, locations of small and large shops, meanings of various stamps, etc, etc on guns and mounts, accessories. Without this kind of reference, we can only guess......

I like the Brit approach with the LOC system, which has been essential to understanding and placing all sorts of interesting mods over the production runs of various MGs. The BMG's also have a well documented production history from the government contracts of spec changes, especially for the .30 cal guns.

Bob
 
#9 ·
....Hopefuly you are cataloguing all the variations that you find with the guns, mounts and accessories, which will be a valuable resource for those interested in these guns. Maybe as time goes by, documents will surface about the details of the 1910 production, refurbishing, locations of small and large shops, meanings of various stamps, etc, etc on guns and mounts, accessories. Without this kind of reference, we can only guess......
I have been updating Dolf's serial number list for some guns. I think I now own the oldest Erfurt and S&H top cover.
http://www.maximmachinegun.com/ I have also been able to make several updates to the Russian list.
 
#10 ·
"Very interesting. How does it move from one hole to the other? Do you have to unscrew the clamp? "

There is no clamp just the pin which fits into either of the three holes. The pin is just a very tight interference fit with key way to help locating.

Presumably in time the pin could wear to the point that it became lose.
 
#12 ·
My estimation that it is 1941, which would differentiate it from late war guns, which are of low quality.

I have a number of photographs, both modern and from WW2 showing this mount, they have one thing in common, they are all with the 1910/41 Maxim, so Finnish pattern water jacket filler, revised rear sight.

I have no photos that I can scan at the moment, as they are in a PDF format within documents, so I will try and extract during the week.

The Ryton Maxims are ex Ukrainian, and have packing dates from the 1970's. When they were refurbished post war, I would estimate that the mounts were renumbered at that time to match the master serial number from the gun, after which when they were packed the shield was stencil numbered to reflect the gun, which is confirmed by the packing sheet.
IMBLITZVT - I now have the Russian WW1 production figures, monthly by year from these they tally fairly well with the original listings I sent to Dolf for the revised Russian section in the 2nd edition of the DPB. So in fact you are using my original data on your site. I think I will extrapolate the new Russian Data I have with the original survey serial number ranges, and if you would like to contact me, I can send this across to you to post up on your site
Regards
DavidA
 
#13 ·
"How does the pin stay in? If you get time for a picture, that would help"

Having checked the mount again there is a small pin coming off the main pin at right angles which goes through a key way on the right hand side.
Having inserted the pin you then twist to lock it so the key way is no longer aliened.

I have asked a Russian collector friend to post this question on one of their forums and they are currently coming up with various suggestions. Most seem to be centered on this being an early production feature.

David - we have discussed the question of numbers on mounts previously on this forum without agreement. Some of my mounts have multiple numbers (some crossed out) suggesting it being war-time as well as post-war practice.

This particular mount has practically every component marked with this number which could perhaps suggest a mount number rather than a gun one.
 
#14 ·
We did indeed, however if your 1931 Maxim with this mount is from the Ryton batch, then they are renumbered to the guns, and do have previous cancelled numbers, at least my example does

My mount which is renumbered under the refurb programme is numbered to the gun. Therefore it follows the gun as it also has smaller components number matched in two letter/digit numbering convention
 
#15 ·
Neil, I have done some more digging on this, whilst the photos I have from Russian show your mount on the 1910/41 Maxims, if you go to DPB 2nd Edition in the Addendum on page 520 and 522 for the Spanish Civil War section, you will see your pattern mount pictured, however if you look closely it is the same mount pictured on both pages, but at least it proves the mount was in service prior to WW2.
 
#18 ·
Not necessarily, the gun, and shield is certainly early as it has the eary Sokolov pattern feed roller on the shield , the gun is a 1910 of WW1 origin, with looks like later profile fusee cover.
To be an early mount, it would have the following attributes.
1. Be made of iron rather than brass
2. Have the rear webs on the frame
3. Have the spirit level in place, or a least the cast rather the blank.
4. The lock holes on either side are twice the number on earlier mounts
5. Traversing ring with lock pegs
6. Legs or evidence of legs



Just to clarify the development of the mounts, there are certainly three types of elevation slot on the Sokolov mount

1. Early five partially formed holes as per attached pics and manual illustrations from 1912 and 1917
I have attached pics from two seperate Russian Manuals dating to 1912 and 1917, these show the original mount with five semi formed positions plus pics of WW1 Maxim and early mount
2. The 1923 re-issued 1930 manual follows the diagrams from WW1
3. It appears that late WW1 / post revolution the five semi formed slots are done away with and we then have the long one piece slot
4. Neil's three hole mount is identified in the 1937 manual, and then found on WW2 pics with the 1910/41



The mount in captain's pics is not an early mount, whilst the gun is WW1 period, a picture I have of the same gun shows the mount from the other side as shown in the 1937 manual


Hope that helps to put some structure around the mount geneology
 
#19 ·
Pics of this gun have been circulated for many years, and one interesting aspect to me is the brass grip frame. I don't know of any of the 1910 kits that came to the US that had brass grip frame. Brass bottom plate, feedblocks, topcover distance piece, trunions front endcaps, etc have all been on the US imports, but so far no brass grip frames!

Bob Naess
 
#20 ·
Bob,

I am not sure they are. If you are just going off color, it looks like the side plate is brass and the complete waterjacket is brass. Its almost like tan paint under a black. There is something odd with the colors, I just don't know what. Plus we have never seen a brass 1910 back grips...
 
#24 ·
Haha... I am betting not. You are fairly new to that forum but Cobra (a member here too) has been going on for a long time about how we pay way to much and the great deals he gets but never has pictures... So don't hold your breath! Its back up now too.

I would be interested to know if they are brass. Bob, I am surprise you state that you think they are brass. Usually you are very conservative on believing new things from little or no conclusive evidence. This one seems far out there to me unless you think thats a brass sideplate too. However I hope you are right, as it would be cool to know that brass 1910 back plates may be out there!
 
#25 ·
I've had a few exchanges with Cobra on that forum, but there wasn't much follow up.......
Whether the grip frame is brass or not is of no particular importance, one way or the other, but I have had a suspicion that grip frames might have been made for the 1910s in brass, but have never seen an example. Color photos of 1910s are exceedingly scarce, and B&W photos will not distinguish between metal colors. This particular example is unique because there are color photos available, and it very well could be the light. The color of the sideplate does make it look like brass, too.
I said it is my "opinion" that it is brass, not that it is......As you know, I try to discourage declarations suggesting facts about something where there is no basis or information available for a factual assessment.

Bob
 
#26 ·
In case you haven't seen it before here is a rear end truncated shot of the grip frames, it puts in perspective the colour of the feedblock.

I have never seen a brass backplate either, and the colouring is difficult in the pic is difficult as it appears to be brass underneath, just for comparison I have attached a pic of 1905 for comparison

David
 

Attachments

#27 ·
Still not totally sure what the consensus of option is on this question.

The suggestion from one of the Russian posters that all mounts (except WW1) up to 1941 had the 3 holes does appear to have some credabilty.
This would however mean that a lot of mounts were converted to the later pattern during post war rebuilds.

Does anyone have any pre 1941 photographs showing the continuous slot in use?
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top