Third Party Press

A new unknown commercial variation, but what is it?

mrfarb

No War Eagles For You!
Staff member
It seems there are very few mysteries left in 98k collecting, and then you find something which makes no sense. Listed on auction as a bcd43 with replaced stock, I knew something was different about this rifle. I noticed the barrel had 2 "U" markings, a sign of a rejected component. Other clues - low serial number and general appearance (hard to quantify).

I've never seen a commercial in a Kreigsmodell stock, but many commercial rifles were made in the 1945 era. This rifle is a factory commercial, akin to the Sauer commercials found made from similar parts. I have no way to connect the stock with the action (meaning did someone restock it) but the overall patina of this rifle is spot on as being original. Several things make me think it's late and totally as built, such as no firing proof on receiver and ghn gas shield.

These are auction pics plus some additional photos. So has anyone else ever seen anything like this?

Also, no Eagle H on the stock so if someone added it the stock is very late - it has no date code under the buttplate.

dbd639c075025dcd18bb59b26dd268a9.jpg


19120383_5_lg.jpg
02f95212ab009062fbd66762e38d8061.jpg


9161787ed9c73237997871e94d72a847.jpg


ad5d0d46c1b88a427319b12a2fb151f7.jpg


86d43770974334d1502b27fbd3fd0229.jpg
 

Attachments

  • 19120383_1_lg.jpg
    19120383_1_lg.jpg
    108.2 KB · Views: 112
  • 19120383_2_lg.jpg
    19120383_2_lg.jpg
    146.3 KB · Views: 89
  • 19120383_3_lg.jpg
    19120383_3_lg.jpg
    312.4 KB · Views: 93
  • 19120383_4_lg.jpg
    19120383_4_lg.jpg
    309.8 KB · Views: 108
  • 19120383_6_lg.jpg
    19120383_6_lg.jpg
    322.5 KB · Views: 97
  • 19120383_7_lg.jpg
    19120383_7_lg.jpg
    327.4 KB · Views: 99
Other than the U markings on the barrel, no other signs of rejected parts use? What date is the barrel?
 
For comparison - this is a Hern Scheider commercial. These don't show a date, but due to 1 sporterized version (second set of pics) we know that by serial this rifle was made Jan-Feb 1945. Note use of similar parts. I post these not to compare makers, but availability of these parts in the timeframe.

Factory commercial rifles skipped the trip to the proof house, as only factories used the Reichsadler Beschußstempel (War Eagle, Dirty Bird, Natzi mark, etc).
 

Attachments

  • K-98%20BCD%2043%20066.jpg
    K-98%20BCD%2043%20066.jpg
    169.8 KB · Views: 86
  • K-98%20BCD%2043%20031.jpg
    K-98%20BCD%2043%20031.jpg
    180.4 KB · Views: 62
  • K-98%20BCD%2043%20014.jpg
    K-98%20BCD%2043%20014.jpg
    209.1 KB · Views: 60
  • IMG_4277.JPG
    IMG_4277.JPG
    102.7 KB · Views: 62
  • IMG_4278.JPG
    IMG_4278.JPG
    73.6 KB · Views: 57
  • IMG_4280.JPG
    IMG_4280.JPG
    77.8 KB · Views: 46
Other than the U markings on the barrel, no other signs of rejected parts use? What date is the barrel?

Bolt components have U marks as well, receiver is commercial U/Diamond marked. Barrel markings are: avk 66 42 bys (arrow) U U 13
 
Thanks to Bruce asking questions, I realized the bolt has no firing proof. That’s another + in the 1945 production assumption. i think this is a very unique rifle.

4b50654c16d2eb05b4137348bc5e07ba.jpg


d009ac9004a03733743c7dd7329e11c2.jpg



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Yeah, I should have said I won it about a month ago.

You should have opened this discussion while the auction was ongoing. I could have bid it up for you.

It seems entirely consistent that these rifles, "JPS commercials" made in late 1944, would be made into 1945. They are made of available and rejected parts. I believe that they were assembled just as the British "dispersal" SMLE Enfields during the heavy Luftwaffe bombings of England. That is, during the heaviest bombings of Germany, when industry and small arms production and transport was effected, these were made by a "dispersed" factory / assembly point. History, facts, and common sense support this. I doubt they would have been made for "commercial" purposes. However, they were made without the oversight of a WaA inspection team. Those teams were whittled away by manpower needs of the front and the new programs to switch K98k and MP.40 production to the new MP.43/Stg.44, which required inspection more than K98ks. When the MP.40 production was being switched, the gap measure for SMGs was the production and purchase of 250,000 Beretta MAB.38/42s. When K98k production was being switched, reliance was upon dot, dou, and I would say other production, like "JPS commercials".

Accordingly, there is no logical reason to presume that these would not follow assembly as other late war rifles. That is, when spares ran out, use current production parts, e.g., kriegsmodell stocks, which were not numbered upon assembly. The balance of this rifle looks completely like it has always been together and the condition is consistent. I'll take it when you tire of it ;)
 
Yeah, I know enough not to post about an auction I want to win. [emoji23][emoji23]

The problem with your dispersal theory is pressure test proofing. Pressure test proofing was not allowed just anywhere, and required expensive and unique equipment to perform the test properly (and legally). This rifle would have been assembled at Gustloff proper, just as the Sauer commercials were assembled at the Sauer factory. There were no bombings at either of those places.

The commercial rifles were meant for non-military entities, such as the Volkssturm or other local defense/official organizations that were outside of the official military issue web. So, the factories produced them outside of Waffenamt inspection requirements using these rejected parts. Volkssturm units did not draw weapons from military stores until units were under the command of the military, which actually happened very little from what I’ve seen. To me it was mostly used for propaganda purposes.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Parts must have been purchased in large volumes from Astrawerke and Kohler etc, by the commercial makers in Thüringia. Purely commercial but here’s one that adds to the perspective from late 1943.
 

Attachments

  • DF589A4B-2424-49BB-938E-35CAEE11D1E9.jpg
    DF589A4B-2424-49BB-938E-35CAEE11D1E9.jpg
    298.6 KB · Views: 49
  • A4C29BEC-1799-455D-81CD-545F012BFA5B.jpg
    A4C29BEC-1799-455D-81CD-545F012BFA5B.jpg
    227.5 KB · Views: 49
  • 72CED494-88CC-4024-84E9-9C5BC5124390.jpg
    72CED494-88CC-4024-84E9-9C5BC5124390.jpg
    288.5 KB · Views: 44
  • 8E2828A6-CCDB-4856-8869-5240DF33408C.jpg
    8E2828A6-CCDB-4856-8869-5240DF33408C.jpg
    285.2 KB · Views: 47
  • FE4550C4-E5CB-4613-BE41-DF312E6ADAD4.jpg
    FE4550C4-E5CB-4613-BE41-DF312E6ADAD4.jpg
    288 KB · Views: 54
Do you think the U and the diamond were applied together? As the diamond looks very similar to the odd little diamond stamps on the back corner of some k43 receivers.

It’s a odd one for sure, but quite cool. The only pistol there are routinely observed on is cyq, zero series seems to use it as it’s own acceptance markings, maybe some odd connection? As it looks like it’s replacing waffenamt on this too.
 
Do we know that the gauleiters and such were authorized to procure weapons for and arm Volkssturm units outside of the channels of the OKW? I'm not a late war / Volkssturm guy, so... As for proof testing, did that consist of pressure testing the action with a proof round?
 
Hambone’s thoughts about the JPS commercials is the first time these have made sense to me. The stock has the “look” to me of having been on the rifle since it was assembled. Great piece, I especially like the bolt with no firing proof!
 
Pressure test proofing is what you think, firing high pressure proof rounds through the action. I don't have the exact procedure, but I know that it was strictly controlled by law, which is why you see SS rifles sent to proof houses and not just done in house. It was not something you could do yourself, facilities were authorized by law to perform the function, hence the proof houses. It is theoretically possible that smaller assembly places could send weapons to a factory for proofing, but factories did not perform that function, regional proof houses did that (Suhl, Zella-Mehlis, Oberndorf am Neckar were the only 3 authorized). As you already know, those places used "Eagle N" firing proofs. Supposedly the law allowed for Branch offices, and from what I read there was a branch office of the Suhl Proof house in Berlin, but I could never find definitive proof of that, only an obscure reference. Regardless, it was very controlled.

As to Volkssturm, I've read enough to be dangerous, and local Gauleiter were tasked with the responsibility of arming local Volkssturm. The Volkssturm was under the control of the NSDAP (Himmler specifically), not the military, hence it was not allowed to draw arms from military stores. However, in the few instances where the Volkssturm fought under Army control they were supposedly armed by the Army. The majority did not have enough arms for the number of people signed up, with obvious attention to arms issue aimed at those Volkssturm units close to the front lines. The Carcano rifles were requisitioned for the Volkssturm - we know that Army depots inspected those guns, so the military did have some role in arming them such as it was. I think a lot of the "Inn4" marked weapons were also for Volkssturm units, you see a lot of oddball guns with that inspection. Imagine supplying ammunition to a unit with 10 different calibers of foreign rifles.

Also, rifles made outside of Waffenamt inspection would NEVER have been officially issued to German military troops, even in the last desperate days, and would not have made their way into the supply system. Locally? Maybe, as a "desperate measure" - ha, the name of Weavers Volkssturm book.
 
I guess what I'm saying is the "proofing" process did not require specialized equipment, just proof loads for firing and the beschusstempel ("dirty bird) stamps showing that was done, on the barrel/receiver and bolt, plus those diamond inspects. Was there authorization to do that at this assembly point? Was the firing proofing done by the provider of the barreled receivers and bolts? Were these much like a depot rework/assembly?
 
Fantastic find, and I agree it looks original. I am also inclined to agree with Mike that these were factory assembled like the Sauer guns. I would think the most likely scenario is Gau Thuringia contracting Sauer and Gustloff to assemble K98ks from their junk piles of rejected parts.

Probably no way to know for sure unless someone finds the documents in the archive, assuming they survived.
 
Very cool to see one in a KM stock. Seems logical that they continued and I’m surprised it’s taken this long for one to pop up. These are interesting guns and I’m curious to see what information comes to light on their production/use
 
I guess what I'm saying is the "proofing" process did not require specialized equipment, just proof loads for firing and the beschusstempel ("dirty bird) stamps showing that was done, on the barrel/receiver and bolt, plus those diamond inspects. Was there authorization to do that at this assembly point? Was the firing proofing done by the provider of the barreled receivers and bolts? Were these much like a depot rework/assembly?

Actually, the proofing did require special equipment to be done properly. Actions were placed in a device and 2 high pressure test rounds were fired. After that, inspections for cracks and bulges were made, with special tools and gauges used to determine if there was any stretching or damage to the chamber. In Vol.1 P. 222-224 Bruce does a good job of giving the basics, along with showing 1 of the tests done and materials used for the test. Pressure test proofing was not a "gunsmith" activity like you imagine, where you crank off a few high pressure rounds and see if it blows up (I guess you and I would call it redneck reckoning). It was strictly controlled and held in high regard - it was meant really as a safety measure, but I bet it was also meant to protect the German gun making industry. Even today you must have official proof houses do this work.

As to assembly, lets put it in perspective, using the Sauer commercials as an example. At the height of production Sauer capacity was 30,000 rifles a month. Divide that by 25 working days a month (roughly) gives you about 1200 rifles a day. Divide by a 10 hour shift it gives you 120 rifles an hour. With the highest serial under 1000, it might take a day to assemble all of the rifles at the height of production. My assumption is these were assembled after 98k production stopped at Sauer, so lets say it take 2-3 days taking their time. It's not too much work for a factory to make them.

Gustloff is a similar situation (assuming the one I just posted is Gustloff). Since we have never seen another, and it's under 100, then feasibly these could be assembled and finished in a few hours time. Gustloff's production line was in full swing. Even 200, or 400 could be done so fast that it wouldn't even be a blip.
 

Military Rifle Journal
Back
Top