Third Party Press
Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 29

Thread: K98k with SEM Saddle mount ("objective mount")

  1. #1
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    1,273

    Default K98k with SEM Saddle mount ("objective mount")

    First of all, the correct designation for what is often referred as "objective mount" is in fact a Suhler Claw Mount which originally is called "Suhler Einhak-Montage" in German, abbreviated as "SEM". There are various types of Claw Mounts, but the Suhler Einhak-Montage can be identified by the fact that the catch/release is a sliding part in the rear base. Secondly, the term "objective mount" is misleading in that this mount can also be attached to other parts than the objective. The position of the soldered on scope rings is most often determined by where the bases on the rifle can be placed, and the eye distance the scope requires.

    But to finally get to the topic: recently scrolling through local (meaning my country, but it isn't so large so for US dimensions it can be called local) ads for selling weapons I came across a listing for a Mauser 98 hunting rifle. The sportered rifle caught my attention for featuring SEM bases of a saddle type (which therefore do not weaken the receiver ring, since the dovetailed part sits on top of it). This also requires a higher rear scope base and a higher rear scope ring and usually results in the scope being a bit higher above the barrel line than being dovetailed directly into the receiver.

    After a quick inspection of the rather very poor pictures I quickly noticed the saddle bases are very identical to the ones of Dave Roberts rifle. The bolt also appeared to be of the military pattern and the barrel still had the military steps and full length, while the open sights were sportered. The price was low (basically covering the parts costs), so I shot the seller a message. He then sold the rifle to me and I finally received it yesterday, not knowing precisely what I had bought.

    Having it in hands, I did have some surprises. The bads were that none of the parts seemed to be matching numbers, the model designation on the receiver wall were scrubbed as the serial number on the receiver. The good thing however was that at least the mismatching bolt happened to be a good surprise in that it was a G.33/40 bolt of which I anyway had been in need for a rifle which recently was discovered on an attic, lacking its bolt (and funnily both are even in the same letter block). The second surprise was that a very closeby inspection unveiled that the scope bases both on bottom and front have a serial number on them - and this serial number matches the serial number inside the barrel channel of the heavily sportered stock (even the buttplate it sportered - but seemed to originate from the same military rifle since it still features the same WaA as on the receiver ring).

    The absence of the serial number and the fact that many parts are mismatching (plus of course the scope bases covering the receiver ring) make it very hard to tell who originally made this rifle. Based on the WaA26 I believe I can make out on the right side of the receiver ring I am inclined to believe this rifle was originally made by BLM. Possibly someone more experienced with those can even give approx. year for it.
    Attached Images Attached Images

  2. #2
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    1,273

    Default

    Since I anyway can only post 10 pictures per reply I thought I would split some text between the messages too ... so there we continue:

    The scope bases are highly interesting in that the rear scope base has a serial number on right side bottom of the catch/release slider. Exactly this same serial number can also be found on bottom of the dovetailed front scope base, but additionally featuring the letters "AR" as prefix.

    Once having had in hands a military Dialytan scope for those sniper rifles which still had the front scope base coming with it I do remember that this base was different in lettering since it had no prefixes. And I think it also was of different dimensions (higher but shorter). And I also know another member here has one of those sniper rifles, but his rifle has the rifle serial marked on front of the rear scope base instead of on bottom as on mine.

    Given the different numbering and the slightly different design, I had thought that the rifle I had purchased might be the Army variant of the Suhler Einhakmontage we recently had been discussing. Any thoughts regarding that would be highly appreciated - also I would ask anyone who owns such a rifle to check the bottom sides of his bases to maybe be able to see if the numbers are in identical or different bases!
    Attached Images Attached Images

  3. #3
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    tx
    Posts
    1,446

    Default

    Itís a 1941 Borsigwalde which probably explains the prefix of ďARĒ in the serial. Having serialized bases doesnít necessarily point to anything military about it, likely just used for the tracking of handfit parts of which there are many in an SEM. The claws alone have 24 hand fit surfaces in an SEM. There were many such sporters built out of ex military and often out of rejected military parts, the lack of any commercial proofs could mean it was some kind of total basement job, not really sure there. Is it simply the sighting groove down the saddle giving the impression of military? Otherwise there are lots of other saddle mounted SEMís out there on commercial hunting rifles.

  4. #4
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Ossipee NH
    Posts
    115

    Default K98 Semi Saddle

    I have a similar K98. I checked for serial numbers on the rear mount and see none. The front mount seems unmovable, so I could not check. The rifle is a bolt MM and came with capture papers. With it came Russian TOZ 35 22 cal. rifle on the same papers. I would be nice to have Dave Roberts check it as he is a local NH person. Regards Banjomike

  5. #5
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    1,273

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by flynaked View Post
    It’s a 1941 Borsigwalde which probably explains the prefix of “AR” in the serial.
    So you mean they re-used the receiver code as prefix?

    Quote Originally Posted by flynaked View Post
    Having serialized bases doesn’t necessarily point to anything military about it, likely just used for the tracking of handfit parts of which there are many in an SEM. The claws alone have 24 hand fit surfaces in an SEM. There were many such sporters built out of ex military and often out of rejected military parts, the lack of any commercial proofs could mean it was some kind of total basement job, not really sure there. Is it simply the sighting groove down the saddle giving the impression of military? Otherwise there are lots of other saddle mounted SEM’s out there on commercial hunting rifles.
    I agree that this is no proof. But the military SEM are distinctively different from commercial ones, especially in the outer shape. The rifle here is no basement job. Note the screw slots perfectly aligning in the rear scope base - exactly identical as on Dave Roberts rifle. In my opinion this was a military rifle which just had any swastikas and serial numbers being scrubbed.

  6. #6
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Illinois
    Posts
    193

    Default

    Cool find! I will be keeping track of this thread since I have quite an interest in this particular variant of K-98k sniper. Thank you for sharing!

  7. #7
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    tx
    Posts
    1,446

    Default

    The AR prefix in the serial number is just a guess, just would seem an odd coincidence given that this is more than likely an AR 41, it could very well be a 243 coded receiver though as well and that would totally kill that theory.

    Hereís what Iím looking at on the receiver, with any kind of base mounting of this type, saddle, SC, Turret etc we usually see prior receiver prep work, hand filling showing from under the base edges, that is all rather minor prep work to correct any machining inconsistencies for the base to receiver fitment which of course has to be very tight to form a strong solder joint. This of course would not take off the serial and proofing. Looking at your receiver the contours appear very perfectly round especially at the base edges. Presume there was an existing serial and proof mark here, how could that depth of material removal be accomplished without a severely noticeable low spot in the receiver contour? Notice the depth and irregular contour of the mod 98 removal as well as its poor execution, how could (presumably) the same guy have done such precise job to remove punched numbers and proofs within such close proximity to the base edges. Say your punched/roll marked number depth was somewhere around .015 deep, the blend ratio required to remove that much material would leave a noticeable low spot in the contour, based on that alone I believe the receiver was severely recontoured to the point of serial removal prior to the base install, just my opinion based on what Iím seeing in the pictures.

  8. #8
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    tx
    Posts
    1,446

    Default

    That is of course assuming a military application of these mounts would not have been acceptable to completely remove/obscure the receiver serial and proofing, to that question I will have to defer to the collective knowledge of observed examples of these. This was of course acceptable later on in the case of the SC bases, however so was the omission of receiver serials in this time frame as well.


    ***this forward receiver section would be very helpful to see from the front to determine if the contour is true or not, hard to tell from the pictures, if this is indeed a low spot then I would agree with proof removal.
    Attached Images Attached Images
    Last edited by flynaked; 01-11-2019 at 02:14 PM.

  9. #9
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    tx
    Posts
    1,446

    Default

    The more I look at that forward section the more I think it might have had a proof ground, only looking from the back end of the receiver ring makes it hard to tell. Would certainly be awesome if it is deemed authentic! The other thing it has going for it is the milling at the charging bridge, itís milled forward instead of removing more material from the rear base like most commercial SEM mounts, possibly a military feature??

  10. #10
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    1,273

    Default

    Serial and proof on left receiver have been removed pretty crude too. You still can make out the top line of the proof (wings top). See yourself..

    Edit: milling forward of rear scope base is typical for military SEM mounts. See Dave Roberts rifle on the website of Matt here: https://www.wwiigermansniper.com/obj...nt-double-claw
    Attached Images Attached Images

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •