Went through two depots Thorn for #10 and Spandau for #3. You can tell that rifle saw a lot of service.
Thanks. Condition wise its practically unissued, it definitely saw action, but its really clean with good stock makings and finish.
Im assuming one of those depot stops could be for the 88/05 conversion.
View attachment 161049View attachment 161050View attachment 161051View attachment 161052View attachment 161053
I like it post it up on the Imperial section by itself looks to be a nice rifle. To be honest it's really hard to find one of those in that kind of condition. Good find too say the least.
It is a sure bet that the crescent moon was German applied, not sure about the RS scale, - I say this because there are rifles that have the crescent on the receiver (all late Mauser/1917's or 1918's) but have signs of interwar German or Polish use. It is almost a certainty that some of the arms shipments (trains) were stopped or diverted after the debacle in September 1918 (collapse of Bulgaria), and these rifles returned ended up in Germany or at least in one case Poland.
After the war there is almost no possibility that rifles in Turkey made their way back to Germany or Poland, therefore because crescent moon rifles exist in German and Polish service the marking had to be applied in Germany, - at least in some cases.
Interesting. Would you say then that because of its condition that it is possible it never made it to Turkey?
Could you please look at the album I have posted. I would appreciate any information you might have. I am a little confused between the Kar 98 and the Kar 98a. I thought they they are 2 separate rifles. I believe a new barrel may have been put on in Danzig. The K R 1 stamped on the barrel. The stamps on the right side of the receiver do not match the proofs for the 98a. Any help would be greatly appreciated.
They are not separate rifles, - the distinction lies in time.
All Imperial era (1898-1918) Karabiner 98's were just that, "Kar.98", it was the end of the war and the introduction of the Kar.98b (rifle length, basically a Gew.98 with a sidesling arrangement, modified for mounted soldiers- horseback or motorized) that necessitated the distinction. At that time the Kar.98 became the Kar.98a to distinguish it from the Kar.98b and later Kar.98k (a shortened Kar.98b, though also related to Mauser's experiments with the Standard Modell, - two unrelated experiments that followed an obvious trend, shortening the Kar.98b service rifle to a handier length)
Today we use these 1924-31 designations to distinguish between the general variations, but the subject is more involved depending how detailed you want to get. (there is also the Short karabiner 98 made by Erfurt 1900-1905, generally, there are earlier test rifles known and maybe a 1906, I do not recall offhand)
The KR. 1 means it was a Krupp blank with a lot number "1", just tells you who provided the steel for your barrel. Krupp Steel, a very common supplier. I would have to see more of the rifle, barreled receiver, to say more.
The Paul Mauser Archive has his "Production, calculation and sales book."
http://www.k98kforum.com/album.php?albumid=141
I believe this will get you to my album. I appreciate you taking the time to look at and comment on the rifle. The Paul Mauser Archive has his "Production, calculation and sales book." That would be a goldmine of information if it were reproduced. I know I would like to have a copy.
Again Thank you
I believe I have already commented on the 98a? Perhaps on Gunboards or earlier here.. regarding the barrel, I doubt it is replaced but you do not show the barrel serial for some reason. Typically pre-war production follows less consistency on acceptance patterns, it is not necessarily a problem that the acceptance carried on the barrel deviates from the RR, though limited research has been done here (limited by a lack of samples to compare RR & barrel acceptance patterns, most people will not or do not show the barrel coding on the 98a, probably because the hassle of disassembling the stock properly); however the fireproof looks right for a Spandau and such an early lot is also expected for such an early rifle. However if the serialing fonts are different then this could be a clue that the barrel has been replaced, but doubtful Danzig would have done so, higher ordnance staffs would typically add an acceptance on the RR for a re-placed barrel and the FP on the barrel is not Danzig in style, - most of which are fatter and more elaborate than other arsenals, kind of like a fat turkey.
Any evaluation requires good pictures of all the matching components, specifically the acceptance and serialing, you tried here, but left out the barrel serial. The rest of the rifle guessing w/o pictures.
Jon Speed already published the highlights from the archives, appropriately "Mauser Archives", sold by Collector Grade, it covers a lot of ground and not specifically on military production (which is all that interests me). Because of Jon Speed's work and collaboration with researchers, we know the broad strokes of Mauser's production, - Mauser is not the problem, the others are the mystery, especially the other arsenals, all of which are elusive to find information on. Mostly we go by trends on the rest, but Mauser and to a lesser extent DWM we have a rather good grasp of what they made and what they manufactured.