Third Party Press

WHICH IS CORRECT??? 98 AZ OR 98a

Mr Haney

Well-known member
HI
I found on the enternet Under Gewehr 98 Information about 98 Gewehr 98
The following ...........
In 1908 new features were a small diameter recieiver ring.tapered rather then stepped barrel contour an L shaped stacking rod attached to the stock near the muzzle. A turned down bolt handle and excavation in the stock in the same fashion as the sniper Gewehr 98"s
The A stood for with bayonet The z stood for stacking pyramid, meaning carbine model 1898 with bayonet attacment point and stacking rod device.
In 1923 the AZ was dropped for a as Germany sought to distinguish the model from newer models b"s and the k
So as I said ffrom now on I will being calling the Gewehr 98 a only as the correct terminology..
Best Rergards
Bob
 
Last edited:
Gewehr is not a Karabiner.
The term Gew 98a and/or Gew 98b are old collector terms for what it is now fashionable to call the G98M; a = narrow sling band, b = wide sling band.
 
Bob,

Early writers, specifically Götz, John Walter's and Ludwig Olson all used this early designation, but only John Walter's seems to have adopted the designation for regular production. John Walter's, who references Götz, adopted the full designation from the trail rifle for the regular production model (Karabiner 98 - or as Storz calls it the Modell98 carbine).

Götz seems to take a middle road, making use of the Kar.98AZ designation, but not being too attached to the designation. His book suffers from a very poor English translation, much worse than Storz, and it has been the source of many misunderstandings.

Ludwig Olson is perhaps the best researcher of the early period that wrote on this, he uses the Kar.98AZ designation, and states correctly this was the trials version (the “AZ” standing for Aufpflanz und Zusammenstellvorrichtung or a means for fixing bayonet & stacking arms), and the designation was in use up to 1912. Then it was the Karabiner 98 until 1923 when the Kar.98a was used to differentiate it from the Kar.98b.

The thing is Storz only uses the "A.Z" designation once, doesn't mention it in the "three" versions (Gew.06, Kar.98, and Kar.98Z) but apparently the AZ might have been the final trials version? Or maybe just the designation used to differentiate the final adopted version. As I recall he didn't elaborate much on the "AZ", only mentioning it once, and seemingly only relating it to the final trials version. Like much of Storz book though, you have to browse to find things, often times in places you'd not expect to find information, so he could have explain it better elsewhere, but I didn't see anything revealing.

Anyway, the bottom line is whomever you want to believe, and although Ludwig Olson is the best English language researcher, (I think I have read that he spoke German, and he is known to have collaborated with German collectors, all the top ones of his time), I would have to say Storz seems to be the most accurate and reliable (detailed with images of the trial rifles). He also happens to follow Olson's information closely, so I will stick with the best two sources, and say the Kar.98AZ was at most a trials designation and not appropriate for use for the regular production Kar.98 carbines.

This is supported by period documents I have, and period writings, in German, that only discuss the Modell 98 Carbine, as Karabiner or Karabiner 98, never using another designation until the 1920's.

I will say though that there are German authors, who's work has not been translated, and that I do not own all of their books (I try to buy them but many are VERY expensive), so this might be covered by one of these authors, Wacker, Görtz, Seel, Speed, etc.. If anyone knows, it would be CB.
 
I agree, this is seen in older newsletters and sometimes still used by older collectors- when I see these older terms used I know the guy has been around awhile.

The Gew.98M designation, as CB points out, just a collector’s designation, is used these days, but I have been trying to strive for a more accurate designation. The Gew.98M, usually refers to the rear sight upgraded rifles in general, while the older terms rely on the bands, I guess the rear sight a given, but I think it is high time to come up with an accurate designation system.

I always like to use German, the correct designation, where possible, when it isn't too wordy (German words are often compound words and often impossible to learn to write out correctly without a cheat sheet...) but the only one I have ever come across that I liked at all was Mark Wieringa designation, "Gew.98 mit sS Visiere", which only refers to the rear sight again.


Gewehr is not a Karabiner.
The term Gew 98a and/or Gew 98b are old collector terms for what it is now fashionable to call the G98M; a = narrow sling band, b = wide sling band.
 
There is official terminology, terminology derived from markings on the rifles themselves, and collector terminology.
Official terminology varies with the period and can vary from agency to agency applying it in the same period. A Kar 98 of 1904 is not the same as a Kar 98 of 1909 or a Kar98 of 1925 or a Kar 98 of 1941. Attempts to establish logic with official designations are pointless: the designation is what it is because Authority says that's what it is.
Markings on specimens vary and often vary from official terminology.
Consistency is not a characteristic of official or markings terminology.
Collector terminology is just that; it can be a more precise descriptor than either the official terminology or the markings on specimens.
Collector terminology has a tendency to evolve in the direction of more complexity (and theoretically precision) over time; for an example, note the elaborate and continuously evolving collector terminology currently applied to Lugers.
We are heading in the same direction with rifles.

BTW, German contemporary useage is often inconsistent even within the same document.
 
Excellent points, I agree, - what do you use as the designations? What do you think, based upon your experience, the best designations for the various German military Modell98 variations?

There is official terminology, terminology derived from markings on the rifles themselves, and collector terminology.
Official terminology varies with the period and can vary from agency to agency applying it in the same period. A Kar 98 of 1904 is not the same as a Kar 98 of 1909 or a Kar98 of 1925 or a Kar 98 of 1941. Attempts to establish logic with official designations are pointless: the designation is what it is because Authority says that's what it is.
Markings on specimens vary and often vary from official terminology.
Consistency is not a characteristic of official or markings terminology.
Collector terminology is just that; it can be a more precise descriptor than either the official terminology or the markings on specimens.
Collector terminology has a tendency to evolve in the direction of more complexity (and theoretically precision) over time; for an example, note the elaborate and continuously evolving collector terminology currently applied to Lugers.
We are heading in the same direction with rifles.

BTW, German contemporary useage is often inconsistent even within the same document.
 
Excellent points, I agree, - what do you use as the designations? What do you think, based upon your experience, the best designations for the various German military Modell98 variations?

Absent any accepted standard nomenclature list I use whatever terminology works in context.
 
Correct terminology for early mausers let the members vote???

Hi
I have a idea how about all the members vote on what we want to use for the correct terminology on the early mauser rifles??
may be we can start some thing?
Its just a idea
Regards
Bob
 
Hi
I have a idea how about all the members vote on what we want to use for the correct terminology on the early mauser rifles??
may be we can start some thing?
Its just a idea
Regards
Bob

First you need to define what you mean by "early Mauser rifles."
 

Military Rifle Journal
Back
Top