Third Party Press

1917 Oberndorf a.N. with 1915 Weyersberg Kirschbaum 98/05

BerlinerLuebecker

Senior Member
Recently picked up a matching, unmolested 1917 Oberndorf Gew. 98 with a 1915 98/05 and wanted to share some pictures. I apologize that they aren't the best quality, but they ought to serve.
 

Attachments

  • IMG_4370.JPG
    IMG_4370.JPG
    104.8 KB · Views: 46
  • IMG_4374.JPG
    IMG_4374.JPG
    147.4 KB · Views: 60
  • IMG_4376.JPG
    IMG_4376.JPG
    119.9 KB · Views: 47
  • IMG_4377.JPG
    IMG_4377.JPG
    98.8 KB · Views: 64
  • IMG_4378.JPG
    IMG_4378.JPG
    73.7 KB · Views: 73
  • IMG_4379.JPG
    IMG_4379.JPG
    102.5 KB · Views: 57
  • IMG_4381.JPG
    IMG_4381.JPG
    97 KB · Views: 46
  • IMG_4382.JPG
    IMG_4382.JPG
    87.6 KB · Views: 47
  • IMG_4383.JPG
    IMG_4383.JPG
    106.1 KB · Views: 44
And the 98/05.
 

Attachments

  • IMG_4386.JPG
    IMG_4386.JPG
    84.9 KB · Views: 17
  • IMG_4387.JPG
    IMG_4387.JPG
    104.4 KB · Views: 20
  • IMG_4389.JPG
    IMG_4389.JPG
    94.5 KB · Views: 29
  • IMG_4391.JPG
    IMG_4391.JPG
    54.1 KB · Views: 22
  • IMG_4392.JPG
    IMG_4392.JPG
    90.5 KB · Views: 19
  • IMG_4393.JPG
    IMG_4393.JPG
    95.1 KB · Views: 20
That is a nice rifle- scarce too in this condition (matching & Imperial). I think it is one of the toughest wartime maker-dates to find when you have the condition and the rifle is Imperial (non-Turk). These are dirt common in Turked issue condition, fairly common in Weimar, and down right hard to find full tilt Imperial, especially this nice.

Do you have images of the right receiver? Damn sharp markings for beech too, they can be washed out sometimes.

BTW- this maker-date is also known for oddball stock wood, several known are maple, and Dr. Storz shows some of the oddball stuff MO was working on at this time. This one is typical of the period.
 
Can't believe I forgot that. I know the RC marking indicates an initial inspection failure, which was then overridden (right?). I'd be interested to know what else the markings tell about this one.
 

Attachments

  • IMG_4397.JPG
    IMG_4397.JPG
    88.5 KB · Views: 49
C/RC over the first position is the most common encountered, it is for the hardening of the receiver. Some firms, like Danzig, it was almost used as a final acceptance as it is rare to find a mid-war that doesn't have a C/RC over the first position.

Simson too had a thing for C/RC parts, but it is very common to see C/RC parts on wartime production. Basically means the part failed to meet the inspectors standard and the parts were passed for the revisions to accept. I doubt it was nearly as formal as all this, far too common to see, and what is known of acceptance, especially of small parts, suggest it was all done in large lots (as was typical in the US military also, - whole article have been written on US Army lot inspection, the practicality and safety of the procedure... Storz barely mentions it but does briefly.)
 
I have the same year and maker bayonet

Except it is not a sawback. It was with a 1917 C. Schilling, also all matching, but duffle cut. I shot it a bit before someone talked me out of it, and it was a very accurate rifle.
 

Military Rifle Journal
Back
Top