I am pleased you were able to acquire the rifle!
Before I posted on this, I reviewed my files on DWM/16, and surprisingly I found out a couple of interesting things.
There are two others known with two-piece stocks, one owned by a friend in Alabama and another in the “bb” block. Almost as interesting, when I trended the DWM beech stocks and how they are marked, I found that usually beech stocks are not marked “B” early in 1916, that incrementally, starting late in the “s” block, increasingly so in the later blocks (u-z blocks), they start to place a small “B” above the cypher, and this is irregularly applied through the dual suffix ranges.
Anyway, a few comments, - I think this rifles stock is original to its manufacture for a couple reasons. One, that others are known nearly identical to yours- beech stocks with early features close in range (“
bb” has grips and takedown but most rifles in your rifles range have no grips & the unit disc) – and that the cypher is on the lower part and I doubt this would have been applied during a repair. I also doubt an armorers stock would be selected from a two-piece stock and most armorer stocks do not have cyphers applied.
Secondly, until now, when I looked through the database, the general consensus (
past threads on this topic & discussions between collectors) was that this feature was
mostly seen-most common amongst latewar Danzig and Erfurt Modell98 rifles. Something you would expect from government operated firms, making use of expediencies, and something you would not expect from DWM.
DWM is widely regarded as the equal of Mauser in quality, and they two made the highest quality product of all the makers (
Suhl firms were not good makers, they all had a lot of problems and seem to have the most issues with fit & finish, - try and swap parts… they are the worse to “restore”. The state run facilities were often very sloppy, especially Erfurt and Danzig).
So it is a little odd to see this on mid-war rifles, but I suspect this was a product of the reason why substitute stocks were adopted in the first place? This time frame was a critical time for rifle production, not the end of the war as in World War II. The German Army rifle shortage was most acute in 1915-1916, somewhat similar to the 1941-1942 period when the Russian Campaign brought out expediencies, so too in 1915-1916.
This is the time you see salvaged pre-war and previously rejected receivers recycled through the Suhl firms and Danzig. You see the introduction of ersatz bayonets, slings, and substitute wood used in stocks. I suspect these two-piece stocks were a similar expediency allowed at DWM, who in 1916 was a massive manufacturer of the Gew.98, tied with Spandau and not far behind Danzig (
DWM-Spandau tied for second place at around 370-380k rifles each, in current trends)
Re- the rear band, looks like it is cocked to the side, obviously a use or postwar modification. I would change it back if possible and cut off that rear loop on the buttstock. It is not a German feature and considering it is cocked too, it was probably done by the previous owner. Possibly to make the rifle easier to carry? Who knows, but it isn't German military and I would reverse them.
Thanks for the BC, it fits many other DWM in this range and supports the rifle being original. (
so far, in the very preliminary Imperial BC study, DWM used a lot of Böhler blanks in this period-range)
This ones been through a lot....pretty rough shape and the only matching parts are the stock (bp and bayo lug), cleaning rod, sights, both bands, bbl, and rec. Its got a great bore and I got it for so cheap i couldnt pass it up.
Im curious about the 2 piece stock? Factory or repair? Only numbered externally on the keel.
Also, what is up with the lower band? it does not appear to have damage or be misformed...it circles the stock perfectly, but the sling holder is to the side??
any thoughts appreciated.
.......Paul the bbl code is Bo 646
