Third Party Press

1917 Oberndorf GEW98

3

3rdpursuit

Member
This is my first post so I’d like to thank everyone for the contributions you’ve made that have proven so informative. I’ve recently received a Gew98 and a DOU 44 code K98 from an estate and was wondering if someone could help decipher the markings and originality. This post will be about the Gew98, I’ll post about the DOU44 at a later time. I don’t see any Turkish property markings, and the barrel channel of both the handgiard and stock also match the rifle which is matching itself to the screws. Any info or comments are welcome and appreciated.B619C346-BFCE-4F1C-81A5-288EF5E4F788.jpg
 

Attachments

  • E0E2A480-216E-4B76-A7E6-31F2415952D0.jpg
    E0E2A480-216E-4B76-A7E6-31F2415952D0.jpg
    298 KB · Views: 87
The fact that it’s a 1917 WMO is not what makes this uncommon but rather the fact that this is full imperial example. The overwhelming majority produced that year went to the Ottoman Empire and are usually in very poor condition. Looks like a pretty nice one from what you show. Is it all matching? The stamps you’re referencing are the firing proof on the left of the receiver and the acceptance on the right side. Your action cover is from a Brazilian m1908.
 
Thanks for the reply. The following parts are numbered and matching:
Front sight
Upper band
Bayonet lug
Lower band
Rear sight
Rear sight base
Trigger guard
Floor plate
Upper and lower trigger guard screws
Barrel/Receiver
Bolt body/shroud/safety/cocking piece
Butt plate
Stock/hand guards
IIRC the estate also had a 1908 Brazilian but I didn’t try to get it too. I guess the family didn’t realize it went with that rifle.
 
3rdpursuit said:
BTW, what is the meaning of the “RC” stamped above the first proof on the right side of the receiver?
Click to expand...

A revision commission marking, the receiver was slightly out of tolerance when it was made, then approved after it was reviewed. You don’t see them too often on Mauser made rifles, you see them all the time on Danzig and Erfurt guns.
 
Sam is absolutely correct, a Mauser/17 is damn rare in this condition, - as Sam stated, most rifles that have survived from this maker-date were sent to Turkey (not that most Mauser/17's went to Turkey, rather most Mauser/17's that have survived went to Turkey. We know that the Turkish contract was nowhere near Mauser's 1917 total production, undoubtedly, like most G98's, most were destroyed during or after the war between 1919-1925); though even the fact it didn't get molested in Turk service is only half the issue. What is more remarkable is its apparent condition and no sign of interwar service. The bolt/TG is factory of course, but the main question is the stock... it looks like its been sanded, but beech is harder to evaluate than walnut. As anyone will tell you, the stocks condition is incredibly important to value and desirability.

I assume the stock acceptance are weak or washed out? If you took pictures of the barrel when you had it apart, did you get the barrel code on the barrel?
 
Thanks for the helpful info. Yes unfortunately it does appear the wood has been sanded at some point and stock markings are faint but still present. I did take it apart to verify that the wood matches, which it does. The serial is also visible on the underside of the stock even though it has been sanded.
Stupid me🤓didn’t think to take pics of the barrel codes while I took it apart, but my curiosity has persuaded me to have a look when I get a chance to take it apart again. Thanks again for the info and the compliments.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Military Rifle Journal
Back
Top