Third Party Press

LSR k98 opinions

Sayer

Member
Hello,

I wanted to get opinions on this LSR k98.

http://imgur.com/gallery/QN67vcA

Scope is marked dow and serialized 1930 which I read the 19 prefix was correct, mount is marked 8334u
Rifle is BCD4 115xx

I am asking for opinions on the originality of the rifle as a whole?

Thanks!
 
Hard to completely say from the pictures posted their not coming in real clear and would need some better pictures of the fonts and numbering. The floorplate looks correct though.

Is the buttplate checkered or smooth.
 
Hello,

I wanted to get opinions on this LSR k98.

http://imgur.com/gallery/QN67vcA

Scope is marked dow and serialized 1930 which I read the 19 prefix was correct, mount is marked 8334u
Rifle is BCD4 115xx

I am asking for opinions on the originality of the rifle as a whole?

Thanks!

Looks like a Gustloff LSR, stock looks correct, although it may have been sanded. The scope is a Dow center focus and the mount looks like an early type with milled bands. The scope and mount were originally on a Sauer finished rifle. We need clearer photos and some close ups. That Cavalry rear sight cover needs to go.
 
LSR for discussion

This gun has been circulating lately and as best as I can tell has been completely refinished.
Being a 5-digit Gustloff rifle, it should be phosphated and not blued.

Not a collector grade gun by any means.

I had to tell the owner of it last year of its condition and non-originality.
 
This gun has been circulating lately and as best as I can tell has been completely refinished.
Being a 5-digit Gustloff rifle, it should be phosphated and not blued.

Not a collector grade gun by any means.

I had to tell the owner of it last year of its condition and non-originality.

What would you say the value or a good price is for this weapon?
 
What would you say the value or a good price is for this weapon?

To be honest , his asking Price when it was listed at GB was in the Ball Park . Just the Scope Mount & Base sell for between 4k to 5k .
But as Bruce pointed out its been ReBlued and has wrong stock , plus it should also have a checkered butt plate as well .
 
Last edited:
Another thing I noticed, correct me if I'm wrong, but all proof markings on the receiver point to a Sauer receiver. (37 proof on right side and top of receiver... hard to see with the quality of photos but clearly present) and the eagle on the left side of the receiver. I believe now that this is a sauer receiver that was assembled with an all matching BCD4 (why????) Which leads me to the question: 1. Did the Russians reassemble captured German weapons?

My thought process is that if I was king of fake snipers, and I had an all matching BCD4 rifle, why not just use the existing receiver to drill my original scope and mount into. That doesnt make any sense at all, so I am wondering if something like that was done by the Russians.

Is there any other explanation for such an odd piece??

Thanks.
 
Sayer,
JP Sauer used bcd 4 receivers to assemble Long Side Rail snipers. JPS blued these receivers while Gustloff used phosphate.

The main issue with this rifle is it has a 5 digit serial number. Sauer did not use a 5 digit serial number. So you know that the receiver is a Gustloff, but it is blued when it should be phosphate.

Hope this helps.
 
Sayer,
JP Sauer used bcd 4 receivers to assemble Long Side Rail snipers. JPS blued these receivers while Gustloff used phosphate.

The main issue with this rifle is it has a 5 digit serial number. Sauer did not use a 5 digit serial number. So you know that the receiver is a Gustloff, but it is blued when it should be phosphate.

Hope this helps.

I understand that gustloff did the final acceptance. But what about this...

Even in these blurry photos, when zoomed you can clearly see the presence of the WaA 37 on the right side of the receiver, and the eagle on the left side of the receiver. (Sauer acceptance) the waffenamt on the top of the receiver is too difficult to see.


http://imgur.com/gallery/ssQrqDP

^ Zoomed photos of acceptance marks.
 
Sayer,
JP Sauer used bcd 4 receivers to assemble Long Side Rail snipers. JPS blued these receivers while Gustloff used phosphate.

The main issue with this rifle is it has a 5 digit serial number. Sauer did not use a 5 digit serial number. So you know that the receiver is a Gustloff, but it is blued when it should be phosphate.

Hope this helps.

Also, I'm pretty sure it has been refinished as well, since gustloff phosphates everything. I am simply trying to figure out what's up with the acceptance stamps on the receiver and why this was done. Thanks!
 
Also, I'm pretty sure it has been refinished as well, since gustloff phosphates everything. I am simply trying to figure out what's up with the acceptance stamps on the receiver and why this was done. Thanks!



What is the Final Acceptance above the BCD Code ????? Is it also WaA37 and if so it is very likely that someone replaced the Barrel with a Gustloff Barrel not knowing that it was a Sauer Finished LSR . IMHO it was a Sporter Restoration . Best Regards
 
What is the Final Acceptance above the BCD Code ????? Is it also WaA37 and if so it is very likely that someone replaced the Barrel with a Gustloff Barrel not knowing that it was a Sauer Finished LSR . IMHO it was a Sporter Restoration . Best Regards

The entire weapon is matching, the receiver is the only thing that is sauer stamped. If someone faked it, or built it, I have trouble believing that anyone would take an all matching rifle and swap out the receiver (when a gustloff BCD 4 receiver is already correct) I have never seen an all matching k98 for sale without the receiver. I've seen plenty of barreled actions missing parts, but never an all matching rifle without a receiver. Or am I mistaken in this assumption?
 
The entire weapon is matching, the receiver is the only thing that is sauer stamped. If someone faked it, or built it, I have trouble believing that anyone would take an all matching rifle and swap out the receiver (when a gustloff BCD 4 receiver is already correct) I have never seen an all matching k98 for sale without the receiver. I've seen plenty of barreled actions missing parts, but never an all matching rifle without a receiver. Or am I mistaken in this assumption?

Well since its been completely refinished, it could be a lot of things, it could be a restored sporter with fake numbers stamped to make everything match. Maybe the barrel was shite, and the faker decided to replace the barrel, because how are you going to maximise your price on a sniper with a crap barrel?

Look, I am not a sniper guy, but there are guys on this board who probably know more about actual German sniper rifles than anyone out there. If this rifle has been around, seen, and not grabbed up, there is a reason.

Now, it may be a great looking gun, and a great shooter, but the fact remains, no matter how it got in its current configuration, its not a genuine German factory built sniper....
 
It is also possible that someone added fake Sauer proofs to the receiver to make it look like a Sauer rifle. Sauer LSRs bring more money then Gustloff.

Post clear pictures of the receiver markings
 
Ive heard people on here compare fake rifles to road kill.

Let’s say you find a dead possum on the road smashed flat by a car tire. Did it have missing teeth? Did it have rabies? How old was it?

The answer: it doesn’t matter anymore. It’s flat. Don’t try to apply logic to a fake. “But no one would do that, why bother, I would never, I haven’t seen...”

It’s a fake or seriously altered rifle. That’s all that matters. No amount of brainstorming or rationalizing will make it anything other than what it is: roadkill.
 
The entire weapon is matching, the receiver is the only thing that is sauer stamped. If someone faked it, or built it, I have trouble believing that anyone would take an all matching rifle and swap out the receiver (when a gustloff BCD 4 receiver is already correct) I have never seen an all matching k98 for sale without the receiver. I've seen plenty of barreled actions missing parts, but never an all matching rifle without a receiver. Or am I mistaken in this assumption?

You might be shocked by what someone will do to make a Fake specially when big $$$$ can be had !!!!!! Regardless of that the Rifles not correct and it has been restored , that we know . Do you know for certain that its a Thick Wall Receiver ??.
How about pulling the Stock and post a Pic . I would also check the Receiver Wall Thickness .
 
It would not surprise me if someone found a sportered LSR rifle and would restore it by killing an all matching bcd 4 rifle with 5-digit serial number. Also being fully refinished it might even have a welded receiver, to resemble a LSR rifle but not visible any more. If you buy it, you will however have a rifle with documented issues.
 
Replying to another thread here. Also wanted to run this by everyone, as I got very clear photos today. I am honestly thankful that everyone is commenting in, and I am not trying to beat a dead horse, but the amount of information that's out there is often contradicted from one forum to another because of the archives being constantly accessible and never updated to reflect new findings. I would like to make it clear that I am not trying to argue with anyone, it seems that it is perceived that I am trying to argue or justify this rifle, I am trying to get answers to previous questions on other threads that are considered "answered".

This post:

http://www.k98kforum.com/showthread.php?32876-bcd-sauer-or-bcd-gustoff-werke

Is referencing machining marks done by Gustloff Werke and Sauer underneath the thick wall receiver.

On this rifle in question, here is the receiver, compared to what was said to be a gustloff werke receiver in the forum post from 2018.

https://imgur.com/a/9xQZXA8

Also, here are updated photos of the rifle:

https://imgur.com/a/AFVQgRN
 
Replying to another thread here. Also wanted to run this by everyone, as I got very clear photos today. I am honestly thankful that everyone is commenting in, and I am not trying to beat a dead horse, but the amount of information that's out there is often contradicted from one forum to another because of the archives being constantly accessible and never updated to reflect new findings. I would like to make it clear that I am not trying to argue with anyone, it seems that it is perceived that I am trying to argue or justify this rifle, I am trying to get answers to previous questions on other threads that are considered "answered".

This post:

http://www.k98kforum.com/showthread.php?32876-bcd-sauer-or-bcd-gustoff-werke

Is referencing machining marks done by Gustloff Werke and Sauer underneath the thick wall receiver.

On this rifle in question, here is the receiver, compared to what was said to be a gustloff werke receiver in the forum post from 2018.

https://imgur.com/a/9xQZXA8

Also, here are updated photos of the rifle:

https://imgur.com/a/AFVQgRN

Not worth your effort. No one is going to pay big money for a parts gun.
 

Military Rifle Journal
Back
Top