Why was Finnish rifle production so varied?

[pullnhoot25]

So I have been collecting data from multiple forums and other internet sites in an attempt to piece together a comprehensive list of data regarding the Finnish P-series of rifles. In the process, I have discovered that the way these rifles were produced or marked is seemingly erratic. Is there any real reason why these rifles were marked so differently and/or without a real consistent pattern?

Here is the data that I have currently.

https://spreadsheets.google.com/pub?key ... utput=html

As some eye candy to those interested, here is a link to all the P-series photos that I have been able to dig up across the Internet.

https://pullnshoot25.sugarsync.com/albu ... 876_150481

I am always looking for more data and photos! If anything I have posted is incorrect, let me know!

[pullnhoot25]

I almost forgot to include photos of my P-series rifles!

This is my restored P-26. The rifle was bought without a stock and then mated to a correct stock set I found on Gunboards.com



This is a picture of my P-27 when I first got it. Some idiot thought it would be cool to refinish the stock and screw it all up.



This is what the P-27 looks like now after my good friend brought it back to life. Not as nice as the P-26 but this old warhorse at least had some honor restored.


[/QUOTE]

[igorrock]

http://www.egun.de/market/item.php?id=3008419

[w9816]

Is there any real reason why these rifles were marked so differently and/or without a real consistent pattern?

Just my two cents: A young nation (and army), everything has not been fully standardized and everyone not found their place, a lot of material is being repaired and re-used, all this with two main players (Army and CG) and many vendors and suppliers...

[pullnhoot25]

Is there any real reason why these rifles were marked so differently and/or without a real consistent pattern?

Just my two cents: A young nation (and army), everything has not been fully standardized and everyone not found their place, a lot of material is being repaired and re-used, all this with two main players (Army and CG) and many vendors and suppliers...

That is a pretty good reason. However, one would expect to have at least a little consistency among at least a few serial numbers. I find that quite interesting.

History is definitely a silent one on all of this and in the end is probably not highly important. I am just curious about these rifles because not a lot of information is available on them and I think they deserve a better look.

[mosu]

I guess in Civil War the weaponry was miscellaneous and there were many Russian soldiers in the country and they carried Mosin Nagant rifles. Those rifles remained in Finland. After this war Finish Army and CG adopted Mosin as their standard rifle. The Army (with help of private companies too) started to acquire mosins anywhere they only could get them. E.g. Germans had captured a lot of Mosins in WWI and they sold a lot to Finland. There were Mosins in bad conditions too and those were taken to pieces for spare parts. I guess this was the start of a young and poor nations long history to rebild and modify Mosins. IIRC lock frames (hope this correct term  ) were never produced in Finland but used spare parts locks. I do not know which role different arms depots had . And of course there was not only the Army but CG too. This is my dime

[kalju]

Lock Frame = Receiver. Additionally most parts of the bolts in the Finnish mosins are original and were never produced in Finland.