Third Party Press

What is the best quality K98 producer/year

Tikhar

Registered
Hello all, I'm new to the forums and I'm looking to get into the k98 game. I was wondering which K98 manufacturer and/or year has the best production quality. I presume pre-war/early war K98s are better made than the late war K98s but is there any year and manufacturer that stand out? Thanks again.
 
Quality based on what metric? The German’s documented the percent of rifles that passed an accuracy test on the first pass, and that suggests quality at Mauser Obendorf (byf) and at Bruno (dot & dou) we’re relatively high. Steyr (bnz) is notorious for low quality. Fast forward to 2020.... collectors, well at least this collector is happy to find ANY K98k of quality (metric is matched or mostly so). Steyr, despite it’s reputation is quite desirable today while a dou rifle probably less so. My advice, is simple... locate a matched or mostly matched 98 of any maker and rejoice!
 
Quality based on what metric? The German’s documented the percent of rifles that passed an accuracy test on the first pass, and that suggests quality at Mauser Obendorf (byf) and at Bruno (dot & dou) we’re relatively high.

Interesting, given the early war low turret snipers only seemed to be made by Oberdorf and JP Sauer, which indicates Sauer's must have scored reasonably well in the accuracy stakes?
The 147 code 1940 Norwegian capture K98kF1 I used to own seemed to be pretty good quality, and after all Sauer were making them from the start as well as Obendorf?

I'd quite like to find another Sauer made K98, but might be waiting a while for that here in the UK, as any K98k is not easy to come by, let alone maker specific!!
 
I’d have to agree with BiO, byf, dou, and dot. JPS was an assembler of subbed components so that makes sense for them having a sniper program. H&H assembled the No.4(T) snipers and they weren’t a manufacturer. The No.4(T) was an excellent sniping system, one of the best.
 
Erma? They have some beautifully finished rifles before they gave it up for machine guns. I don't recall how well they shot for the testing phase.
 
I’d have to agree with BiO, byf, dou, and dot. JPS was an assembler of subbed components so that makes sense for them having a sniper program. H&H assembled the No.4(T) snipers and they weren’t a manufacturer. The No.4(T) was an excellent sniping system, one of the best.

Not quite.

H&H didn't assemble the 4(T), all they did was machine and fit the scope pads, scope bracket, scope, cheek rest and then fettle the rifle's. They actually received already fully assembled rifles from the ROF factory's (mostly BSA Shirley and ROF Maltby) that had already been selected at the factory as having passed the accuracy tests.

And yes they are excellent, especially in final Mk3 scope form, and yes I have a mint condition all original one, built around Sept/Oct 1944, complete with Transit Chest and all contents. :biggrin1:
 
To drag this further off topic, H&H only began fitting out No. 4 Ts in the middle of the war. The initial batches of snipers were put together by the Enfield arsenal. Most of the pretty No. 4 Ts that are seen today are late war '44-'45 dated and probably saw little if any action, which is why I particularly like my '41 Savage No. 4 T that was FTR'd with a '45-dated replacement barrel. Whether it was worn out shooting fenceposts in training or Germans, I'll never know, but I can tell myself stories!
 
To drag this further off topic, H&H only began fitting out No. 4 Ts in the middle of the war. The initial batches of snipers were put together by the Enfield arsenal. Most of the pretty No. 4 Ts that are seen today are late war '44-'45 dated and probably saw little if any action, which is why I particularly like my '41 Savage No. 4 T that was FTR'd with a '45-dated replacement barrel. Whether it was worn out shooting fenceposts in training or Germans, I'll never know, but I can tell myself stories!

Even some of the later one's ended up with shot out barrels as these were the one that stayed in service post war, and were used in Korea, Malaya, Suez, Aden and even the early day of the troubles in Northern Island prior to the first batch of L42A1's being issued in the early 70's. By the time they were released from service in the 1970's and early 80's the vast majority of them (like mine) had shot out barrels, as were just being put back into store and replaced with ones from stores that were OK.
Mine was fitted with one of the last NOS Enfield barrels about 20 years ago, and then put straight into a big sniper collection and not fired (other than the 2 proof shots) again until liquidation of the collection in 2015.

Oh to find a similar genuine K98k sniper in a similar state as a stablemate, but not much chance of that here in the UK. Only seen one real one for sale in past 5 years here and that was a SS one as well so VERY expensive.
 
With how few factory matched examples are left (more than enough for us collectors but a fraction of amount produced), the statistic of Brunn I/II and MO being having better accuracy out the factory door might not even be applicable anymore. Because with the low sample sizes we have now, individual variations between rifles (e.g., condition of bore) from the same manufacturer probably prevail over manufacturer-based trends when they were new. At least I have a feeling this is the case.

That said, if quality is measured by how good the bluing is, how polished it was from the factory, then the early rifles probably win out. Just find a matched one you like, whether that's in looks or history. All of them go bang, anyhow.
 
All of them go bang, anyhow.

Not here in the UK they don't.

Hundreds and hundreds of decent, including all matching, K98k's have been butchered by de-activation during the past 30 years here, to be bought by non-firearm licence holding collectors or re-enactors.... :facepalm:
 
Erma? They have some beautifully finished rifles before they gave it up for machine guns. I don't recall how well they shot for the testing phase.

No love for the Erma?? You guys are harsh. As an aside I have an early 16 Amberg receiver and bolt that appear pretty minty. Someone on another board years ago swore they were very high quality. 'Hadn't come under any real pressures... the quality of their steel was very good'

I don't know if that's true or not. It is a quality action for as much as I know about a quality rifle action.
 
Not here in the UK they don't.

Hundreds and hundreds of decent, including all matching, K98k's have been butchered by de-activation during the past 30 years here, to be bought by non-firearm licence holding collectors or re-enactors.... :facepalm:

Sad to hear. How bad are the deacts if I may ask?
 
By the time they were released from service in the 1970's and early 80's the vast majority of them (like mine) had shot out barrels, as were just being put back into store and replaced with ones from the stores.

Dragging this a little furthur off topic , what is the round count to shoot out a an Enfield Barrel...and lets add to that , vs a Mauser barrel ? Is there a known life span for either ?

Is there an avg range where accuracy starts to suffer sufficently enough that it can no longer be used to snipe. I am curious if one vs the other used a superior steel ..?
 
Sad to hear. How bad are the deacts if I may ask?

Not sure what you mean, 'how bad'?

If you mean, what is done to de-act them, then it depends on when it was done.

In the UK, before 1988, there was very little that needed to be done, but the rules were changed and made more detailed in 1988, as well as having to be proof stamped with a certificate of deactivation.
For bolt action rifle, between 1988 and 2016-ish, the barrel had to be saw cut along at least a third of its length, and a metal rod welded inside, and a steel pin drilled through the chamber and welded in. The firing pin had to be removed and the bolt face had to be saw cut at a 45 deg angle across the width of the bolt. At least you could still virtually field strip and the actions still worked. For a semi-auto or full auto any gas pistons etc had to be removed as well. Semi-auto's and full auto specs were further tightened in the UK in 1995, with some welding up of actions to prevent field stripping and cocking.
Since then though the dreaded EU got its knickers in a twist after the Paris attacks, and instead of just adopting the UK de-act rules which were the most comprehensive in the EU, it went way further and totally lost the plot, and now everything has to be welded up so no working actions, no stripping. Old spec guns, can't now be sold or traded, they have to be re-submitted and further cut/welded up to the current regs to be able to be sold or traded.
 
..now everything has to be welded up so no working actions, no stripping. Old spec guns, can't now be sold or traded, they have to be re-submitted and further cut/welded up to the current regs to be able to be sold or traded.

Well that's pretty awful. I hadn't realized it had gotten that bad. I suspected a plug welded in the chamber
 
Interesting, given the early war low turret snipers only seemed to be made by Oberdorf and JP Sauer, which indicates Sauer's must have scored reasonably well in the accuracy stakes?
The 147 code 1940 Norwegian capture K98kF1 I used to own seemed to be pretty good quality, and after all Sauer were making them from the start as well as Obendorf?

I'd quite like to find another Sauer made K98, but might be waiting a while for that here in the UK, as any K98k is not easy to come by, let alone maker specific!!

A few year ago when I was in the planning stages of building a LSR sniper clone I took 4 K98's to the range to see which had the best accuracy to use for the project. A CE 43 beat all the others including a Russian Capture byf 44 with a minty bore. The CE 43 was formerly sporterized. the receiver bridge has holes where somebody had a peep sight installed. So its value as a collectible had already been crushed before I got it.
 
I too would be interested to know the general ranking of manufacturers, especially pre-1940 (understanding that the condition of any particular rifle today may have little relation to the average quality of the manufacturer).
 
All I can add to the answer would be to say that, as far as safety is concerned, I understand that the quality of all K98k's, even up to the end of the war was good. I am not aware of any years or makers to be wary of due to poor quality steel or heat treatment, such as the low-numbered 1903 Springfield rifles. I have also heard and read that weapons made by slave labor was inferior or potentially dangerous, but I don't think that has proven to be the case.
 

Military Rifle Journal
Back
Top