Third Party Press

Mainz Depot Danish Krag

cj556

Senior Member
I acquired this one today. It’s a Danish 1889 Krag dated 1899, every number I found is matching to the receiver and it is duffle cut under the rear band. There is a German depot stamp, which I believe is from the Mainz depot under the wrist but no other apparent German modifications I can see.
 

Attachments

  • CEC2D4FE-E134-437D-B1C0-313C70A92BDB.jpeg
    CEC2D4FE-E134-437D-B1C0-313C70A92BDB.jpeg
    191.5 KB · Views: 97
  • 0D532754-B7EF-4526-A169-EB80811DDF43.jpeg
    0D532754-B7EF-4526-A169-EB80811DDF43.jpeg
    187.4 KB · Views: 117
Can you post a clearer close-up of the inspection at the wrist?

I borrowed this photo from the previous owner. Unfortunately I won’t be able to get a better photo.
 

Attachments

  • 42B459C6-C33F-418C-88B4-EE08E9FD1F81.jpeg
    42B459C6-C33F-418C-88B4-EE08E9FD1F81.jpeg
    128.6 KB · Views: 73
I had one that I repaired the duffel cut on; an 1892 with the M10 safety. Let it go in the purge. My Danish grandfather carried one in the Army 1929-1933. Wouldn't mind getting another.

t
 

Attachments

  • otto.1e.jpg
    otto.1e.jpg
    87 KB · Views: 12
I had one that I repaired the duffel cut on; an 1892 with the M10 safety. Let it go in the purge. My Danish grandfather carried one in the Army 1929-1933. Wouldn't mind getting another.

t

That’s awesome you have a family connection with these rifles. I hope you find another soon!
 
There was a family pics of him and three buddies....bicycles and a machine gun...wish I could find it. Still have 40 rounds leftover.

t
 
Last edited:
I borrowed this photo from the previous owner. Unfortunately I won’t be able to get a better photo.
Unfortunately, I don't like it. Stamping isn't great, but what I see doesn't look good.
 
Unfortunately, I don't like it. Stamping isn't great, but what I see doesn't look good.

Ryan, I know you’re quite knowledgeable on these captured guns and I appreciate your input. I’m curious what it is about the stamping that you don’t like for my own knowledge and future reference. I took another photo myself. It’s also worth noting this is the same gun from post #18 in this thread, which is where I borrowed the picture above from: https://forums.gunboards.com/showthread.php?309685-M95-which-one&highlight=Nick+Danish
 

Attachments

  • 3FB6EC3A-598F-4F55-B15F-CAC4591240F0.jpg
    3FB6EC3A-598F-4F55-B15F-CAC4591240F0.jpg
    272 KB · Views: 39
Last edited:
Ryan, I know you’re quite knowledgeable on these captured guns and I appreciate your input. I’m curious what it is about the stamping that you don’t like for my own knowledge and future reference. I took another photo myself. It’s also worth noting this is the same gun from post #18 in this thread, which is where I borrowed the picture above from: https://forums.gunboards.com/showthread.php?309685-M95-which-one&highlight=Nick+Danish

Yeah, I recognized the stamp and gun immediately. Later on, I think a more experienced me might have told Nick I didn't like the stamp, but I could be wrong on that.

As for the stamp, it just looks off to me. With a lot of this depot stuff, we often don't have hard rules on what is good or not good like we do with factory rifles. Sometimes, collectors (myself included) have to make judgement calls on what looks period and "right" and what doesn't, and we sometimes don't agree especially on the odd stuff. I have never seen this stamp on any other rifle before, which is a red flag, and the size and form just look odd to me. In hand it might look better, I don't know.

I'm not saying its 100% a fake, it could be good, but personally I have concerns.

I know this isn't a great answer, but that is the way it is with the depot guns sometimes. I'm sure as people come back from the SOS you might get some more opinions on the stamp.
 

Military Rifle Journal
Back
Top