Third Party Press

G98 mauser 1920 property mark

Xavier

Senior Member
Hi all
please find pictures of a full matching G98 Mauser Oberndorf made in 1917, 1920 property mark.
rear side base modified for sS bullets.
any comment welcome
best regards
Xavier
 

Attachments

  • DSC_1006.jpg
    DSC_1006.jpg
    278.9 KB · Views: 82
  • DSC_1030.jpg
    DSC_1030.jpg
    286.3 KB · Views: 104
  • DSC_1019.jpg
    DSC_1019.jpg
    288.9 KB · Views: 74
  • DSC_0977.jpg
    DSC_0977.jpg
    290.9 KB · Views: 79
  • DSC_1027.jpg
    DSC_1027.jpg
    286.7 KB · Views: 69
  • DSC_1014.jpg
    DSC_1014.jpg
    290.8 KB · Views: 74
  • DSC_0982.jpg
    DSC_0982.jpg
    285.3 KB · Views: 70
  • DSC_1004.jpg
    DSC_1004.jpg
    296.9 KB · Views: 80
Interesting rifle, the markings are not typical of a 1917 MO? Barrel is right though...

What block is it in? How about a clear picture of the right and left receiver? How about the right side of the buttstock, wrist, and underside of the buttstock? Hard to say much w/o more pictures of acceptance pattern.

Hi all
please find pictures of a full matching G98 Mauser Oberndorf made in 1917, 1920 property mark.
rear side base modified for sS bullets.
any comment welcome
best regards
Xavier
 
G98 Mauser 1920 Property Mark

Hi
please find more pictures about that rifle.
hope these help.
regards
 

Attachments

  • 1.JPG
    1.JPG
    127 KB · Views: 51
  • 2.JPG
    2.JPG
    116.9 KB · Views: 54
  • 3.JPG
    3.JPG
    144.4 KB · Views: 64
  • 4.JPG
    4.JPG
    140.5 KB · Views: 60
  • 5.JPG
    5.JPG
    135.4 KB · Views: 58
Yes, they were helpful, I found two others with this style lettering, both late 1916 dated, the RR acceptance is typical of 1916 but rarely seen in 1917, it being so early in 1917 it makes sense now. For some reason Mauser changed style of their lettering a few times during the war, possibly pre-war also, this one is seen in 1916 (and apparently in early 1917 too), but I have not trended this difference to know how common the change is (I went through 1917 and it is only noted once so far). It doesn't seem to have anything to do with the first position acceptance, or any sub-contracting, as this pattern of RR acceptance is noted for others with the other style lettering, - a more block lettering, less elaborate.

Been working on DWM lately, trending their production as they are my next major project coming up. Mauser has always been set for last, as so much has been written on the firm, seems hardly worthwhile to take all the time to trend them out, perhaps I might have to do it anyway, as this is interesting. To me anyway..
 
The 7 in the 1917 rollmark doesnt look like part of the original rollmark. Is it possible that this wasa 1916 receiver?
 
I am sure it is a leftover from 1916, an example of what I mean is attached, this is two 1916 MO receivers, the more block version is one I use to own some years ago, 1784 n and the other is just like this OP rifle (dd block of 1916), with the more elaborate lettering, note the "R", "B" and "F" differences. I found half a dozen like this OP letter, all 1916, usually later production. I have not gone through all of 1916 looking for others yet, but a quickie view seems to suggest they are less common than the more block lettering throughout MO production 1898-1918, so far only noted amongst 1916 and this one 1917.

Not an important topic, but interesting all the same. When I first saw the rifle I thought it very odd, something off, but the barrel markings were clearly right for MO.
 

Attachments

  • MVC-462F.JPG
    MVC-462F.JPG
    68.6 KB · Views: 53
  • 1916.jpg
    1916.jpg
    65.7 KB · Views: 54
Those two rifles were definitely marked using different roll stamps. That is not uncommon with mass production, since roll stamps are often worn, broken, or otherwise become unusable after a time. Usage can range from as few as 2000 impressions to many times that depending on the material of the stamp, how much pressure needs to be applied, and the hardness of the material being stamped. Rifle receiver rings were normally rolled against a semi-circular stamp, both the receiver and the stamp moving to prevent slippage.

Generally, in mass production, when a marking was decided on, a master die was made by hand, by a person called (in English) a die sinker, using hand stamps for letters and numbers and engraving symbols as needed. That die was not reversed; it looked like the finished product would look, but was flat. From that, a number of master stamps were made, and those were used to make working dies from which the round working stamps were made. When all the working stamps wore out or broke, new ones were made from the working dies, and so on. Only when the master die became worn out, unusable, or outdated (e.g., change of company name) would a new master die with possibly a different type font or size be used to make up a new master die.

Obviously, the more impressions that had to be made, the faster the whole die/stamp chain became unusable, and it certainly stands to reason that in 1917, Mauser receiver ring stamps were making a lot of impressions.

There might even have been several master dies made earlier, but if the hand stamps used the same font, it would take a detailed examination of many rifles to find the change points.

Jim
 

Military Rifle Journal
Back
Top