Danzig 1917

[Sir-Peanut]

Forgive my ignorance with these rifles. I collect contract Mauser rifles and recently decided to dip my toes in the Gew98 field.

Here is my second Gew98; a 1917 Danzig. Bolt is not matching to the rifle but matches to itself. The rest of the rifle matches to the screws with the cleaning rod possibly matching but, it’s hard to tell.

I have the rifle disassembled for a gentle cleaning and proper photos. If anybody needs to see anything specific, I am happy to take more quick photos.

Thanks!

 

[Sir-Peanut]

Here is the sling. Any opinions are welcome on this. I am not sure if this is an old reproduction or if it’s original.

 

[chrisftk]

Holy Smokes Don. Bolt mm or no, that's a screamer. I love the late, nasty beech Danzig Stocks. I won't steal Sam's thunder on the Gl. V. significance on this one, but it's definitely a new record! First pattern sling too that looks original (or a very convincing repro)

Glad you are staying slightly from pretty crest guns. Lol.

 

[Sir-Peanut]

Haha! Thank you, Chris. I hold you and Sam in contempt for me straying out of my lane. Although, I’m feeling pretty good about this venture.

 

[chrisftk]

Haha! Thank you, Chris. I hold you and Sam in contempt for me straying out of my lane. Although, I’m feeling pretty good about this venture.

We are happy to corrupt you Don, you a class A guy, humble and one of the funniest guys I've met--- Hope you get more this year!

 

[Sir-Peanut]

We are happy to corrupt you Don, you a class A guy, humble and one of the funniest guys I've met--- Hope you get more this year!

I suppose I better find a few more then…. Those are some big shoes to fill! But really, I truly appreciate you guys and your help in all things German.

 

[mauser1908]

Don, this is an incredibly significant rifle. 1. It's the earliest known GL.V. marked rifle from Danzig by over 40,000 rifles. 2. It's the first occurrence of both marked and unmarked sights in the same block. This fact has been true of Amberg for sometime now but marked Danzig examples seem to have had a much lower survival rate so this hasn't become evident until now.

A few points of interest, there are two very distinct font styles the left photo is Amberg, the right is Danzig. Each has two different acceptance patterns, Danzig is C/B, Amberg is C/J. C/B is most notably also found on Spandau made rear sights from the 1916 and 17 period. Cyrus first noticed this fact and posed the idea that it's likely Spandau may have had something to do with subcontracting sights for Danzig. Another possibility is part of their inspection team ended up at Danzig post 1917. What's most interesting about this rifle is the font is Amberg, the acceptance is Danzig, and the numbering is Danzig but slightly larger than the rest of the rifle. The meaning of this remains to be seen but this is undoubtedly one of the first rifles to be part of the Gl.V process.

After many discussions with Wolfgang, we both came to the conclusion that the Gl.V marking likely doesn't have a complete link to the Zeiss Glasvisier 16. Rather, the marking identifies rifles that met a high enough standard to be used as sniper rifles either Glasvisier 16 or conventional. When Storz remarks about these being suitable for the Glasvisier, he specifically refers to the Glasvisier 16. I think it's very possible that originally the term Glasvisier just meant glass sight, Zeiss Glasvisier or any conventional sniping optic. These marked guns may have been a pool of suitable rifles that could have been diverted to the optical companies when Danzig and Amberg received orders for snipers. I think the data may be beginning to bear this out, one thing I can say for certain is the marking was omitted on certain rifles for a reason.

 

[chrisftk]

Don, this is an incredibly significant rifle. 1. It's the earliest known GL.V. marked rifle form Danzig by over 40,000 rifles. 2. It's the first occurrence of both marked and non marked sights in the same block. This fact has been true of Amberg for sometime now but marked Danzig examples seem to have had a much lower survival rate so this hasn't become evident until now.

A few points of interest, there are two very distinct font styles the left photo is Amberg, the right is Danzig. Each has two different acceptance patterns, Danzig is C/B, Amberg is C/J. C/B is most notably also found on Spandau made rear sights from the 1916 and 17 period. Cyrus first noticed this fact and posed the idea that it's likely Spandau may have had something to do with subcontracting sights for Danzig. Another possibility is part of their inspection team ended up at Danzig post 1917. What's most interesting about this rifle is the font is Amberg, the acceptance is Danzig, and the numbering is Danzig but slightly larger than the rest of the rifle. The meaning of this remains to be seen but this is undoubtedly one of the first rifles to be part of the Gl.V process.

After many discussions with Wolfgang, we both came to the conclusion that the Gl.V marking likely doesn't have a complete link to the Zeiss Glasvisier 16. Rather, the marking identifies rifles that met a high enough standard to be used as sniper rifles either Glasvisier 16 or conventional. When Storz remarks about these being suitable for the Glasvisier, he specifically refers to the Glasvisier 16. I think it's very possible that originally the term Glasvisier just meant glass sight, Zeiss Glasvisier or any conventional sniping optic. These marked guns may have been a pool of suitable rifles that could have been diverted to the optical companies when Danzig and Amberg received orders for snipers. I think the data may be beginning to bear this out, one thing I can say for certain is the marking was omitted on certain rifles for a reason.

View attachment 302831View attachment 302832

Sam, I am very much in agreement that I feel.the Gl. V is more an indicator of a top percentile accuracy. Just a hunch, but maybe rifles that met the test were marked, set aside and divided up for optics companies for sniper conversion and some issued for designated marksman with the Zeiss optics. Just thinking out loud

 

[Sir-Peanut]

Don, this is an incredibly significant rifle. 1. It's the earliest known GL.V. marked rifle from Danzig by over 40,000 rifles. 2. It's the first occurrence of both marked and unmarked sights in the same block. This fact has been true of Amberg for sometime now but marked Danzig examples seem to have had a much lower survival rate so this hasn't become evident until now.

A few points of interest, there are two very distinct font styles the left photo is Amberg, the right is Danzig. Each has two different acceptance patterns, Danzig is C/B, Amberg is C/J. C/B is most notably also found on Spandau made rear sights from the 1916 and 17 period. Cyrus first noticed this fact and posed the idea that it's likely Spandau may have had something to do with subcontracting sights for Danzig. Another possibility is part of their inspection team ended up at Danzig post 1917. What's most interesting about this rifle is the font is Amberg, the acceptance is Danzig, and the numbering is Danzig but slightly larger than the rest of the rifle. The meaning of this remains to be seen but this is undoubtedly one of the first rifles to be part of the Gl.V process.

After many discussions with Wolfgang, we both came to the conclusion that the Gl.V marking likely doesn't have a complete link to the Zeiss Glasvisier 16. Rather, the marking identifies rifles that met a high enough standard to be used as sniper rifles either Glasvisier 16 or conventional. When Storz remarks about these being suitable for the Glasvisier, he specifically refers to the Glasvisier 16. I think it's very possible that originally the term Glasvisier just meant glass sight, Zeiss Glasvisier or any conventional sniping optic. These marked guns may have been a pool of suitable rifles that could have been diverted to the optical companies when Danzig and Amberg received orders for snipers. I think the data may be beginning to bear this out, one thing I can say for certain is the marking was omitted on certain rifles for a reason.

View attachment 302831View attachment 302832

Sam, your help with this rifle has been invaluable! If it wasn’t for the guidance from you and Chris, I likely wouldn’t have bought this rifle. I believe you two kidnapped the little guy who usually sits on my shoulder and tells me to stick to contract Mausers!

 

[chrisftk]

I believe you two kidnapped the little guy who usually sits on my shoulder and tells me to stick to contract Mausers!

We replaced him with a little guy with a pickelhaube that says "ja" whenever you ask if you should buy a Gew98.

 

[Stan]

I was just looking at Storz's chapter on the Gl.V marked rear sights. From what I understand, he states that the tolerances on the rear sights wasn't uniform enough to allow a consistent mounting of the glasvizier optical sight in many cases. A new standard was issued for tolerances to the rear sight to correct that issue and the new spec. rear sights were marked Gl.V. I didn't see any mention of an accuracy standard by Storz, although that would seem important for any rifle selected for optics mounting.

 

[PrayingMantis]

Great Danzig, Don! Added to the reference.

 

[mauser1908]

Sam, I am very much in agreement that I feel.the Gl. V is more an indicator of a top percentile accuracy. Just a hunch, but maybe rifles that met the test were marked, set aside and divided up for optics companies for sniper conversion and some issued for designated marksman with the Zeiss optics. Just thinking out loud

I think you're right Chris, Wolfgang thinks applied after the first test fire. This was done to create a pool of rifles that could be drawn from to fill orders. To what degree these were retained at the factory filling that role would be fascinating to determine. Not sure if that's something that could ever be determined unfortunately.

I was just looking at Storz's chapter on the Gl.V marked rear sights. From what I understand, he states that the tolerances on the rear sights wasn't uniform enough to allow a consistent mounting of the glasvizier optical sight in many cases. A new standard was issued for tolerances to the rear sight to correct that issue and the new spec. rear sights were marked Gl.V. I didn't see any mention of an accuracy standard by Storz, although that would seem important for any rifle selected for optics mounting.

To add some thoughts, I began the study with Strorz' work in mind. His statement, I believe, is true. I also think the marking has more than one implication; and the original term Glasvisier in reference to the Gl.V. marking has possibly has been misinterpreted over the years.

1. If this was a simple sight tolerance issue, why didn't every manufacturer implement it?

If it was a simple tolerance issue, every maker eventually would have corrected this problem. To cite a few examples, lug recessed bolt chambers, ovular ejector screw holes, grease recesses on triggers. All were updates correcting problems that were universally applied by every maker (eventually). I use WMO as a control because there are large numbers of 1918 dated rifles with original rear sights. I have not made a single observation of a 1918 WMO with a matching Gl.V. marked rear sight. With that being said, there has been no observation of any other 1918 dated rifle with a matching Gl.V. marked rear sight other than Amberg and Danzig. The reality is, those were the only two manufacturers with Gl.V. rear sights applied at the factory level. An interesting observation is, by 1918 Amberg and Danzig were also the only manufactures receiving and filling orders for sniper rifles.

2. Address the Glasvisier itself. The observed high number is 6106. It's likely production ended not long after that optic was produced. With such low production and consideration for its revolutionary nature, under no circumstances would rear sight tolerances be the only criterion to determine which rifles were assigned this optic and which weren't. I think it's safe to assume GPK would not have approved this optic, or any optic for that matter, to be used on guns of only marginal accuracy. As Chris said above, I think these guns were in the top percental of accuracy when they went through the testing and acceptance process. Every conventional sniper rifle from 1917 and 18 I've observed has also had a Gl.V. marked rear sight. I think the marking is likely a control mark representing suitability for the use of any optic, conventional or Zeiss Glasvisier. I don't believe it's a coincidence that the only manufacturers who applied these sights were also the only manufacturers filling orders for sniper rifles.