Third Party Press

K98 single claw for review

MarkDD

Well-known member
Hi,
this is for sale in the uk says its all original ,I can't afford it but if its real someone may be interested ,so whats the verdict.
Mark
 

Attachments

  • 1.jpg
    1.jpg
    225 KB · Views: 140
  • 2.jpg
    2.jpg
    223.4 KB · Views: 110
  • 7.jpg
    7.jpg
    88.6 KB · Views: 141
  • 8.jpg
    8.jpg
    83.3 KB · Views: 135
  • 9.jpg
    9.jpg
    77.9 KB · Views: 166
  • 10.jpg
    10.jpg
    263.2 KB · Views: 108
  • 11.jpg
    11.jpg
    58.4 KB · Views: 115
  • 12.jpg
    12.jpg
    114.9 KB · Views: 99
  • 13.jpg
    13.jpg
    72.6 KB · Views: 104
  • 15.jpg
    15.jpg
    251.8 KB · Views: 88
  • 17.jpg
    17.jpg
    68.2 KB · Views: 81
  • 18.jpg
    18.jpg
    53.1 KB · Views: 81
  • 19.jpg
    19.jpg
    288.5 KB · Views: 123
  • 20.jpg
    20.jpg
    64.4 KB · Views: 72
  • 21.jpg
    21.jpg
    269.4 KB · Views: 77
  • 22.jpg
    22.jpg
    212.2 KB · Views: 70
  • 24.jpg
    24.jpg
    244.9 KB · Views: 67
  • 25.jpg
    25.jpg
    56.8 KB · Views: 68
  • 27.jpg
    27.jpg
    223.6 KB · Views: 78
  • 27a.jpg
    27a.jpg
    142.3 KB · Views: 75
only photos
 

Attachments

  • 29.jpg
    29.jpg
    292.7 KB · Views: 59
  • 28-1.jpg
    28-1.jpg
    200 KB · Views: 56
  • 30.jpg
    30.jpg
    162.9 KB · Views: 61
  • 31.jpg
    31.jpg
    223.1 KB · Views: 61
  • 32.jpg
    32.jpg
    208.6 KB · Views: 62
  • 33.jpg
    33.jpg
    54.3 KB · Views: 56
  • 34.jpg
    34.jpg
    245 KB · Views: 55
  • 35.jpg
    35.jpg
    259.3 KB · Views: 61
  • 36.jpg
    36.jpg
    106.3 KB · Views: 52
  • 37.jpg
    37.jpg
    148.5 KB · Views: 59
  • 38.jpg
    38.jpg
    216.5 KB · Views: 56
  • 40.jpg
    40.jpg
    267.8 KB · Views: 59
The Rings and Bases have been force matched/renumbered to match the Rifle number imo . Also I do not see the WaAD36 proof anywhere on the barrel .
 
Last edited:
Jordan, Steyr is not the one who numbered the bases and rings. That was done at Marholdt.

Thank you for the correction Matt single claws are not my main collecting focus, alot more studying too do!

I don't like the fonts they look off from original examples. But we already know the rifle is not original so that doesn't really matter now.
 
Dave, when do we think that they started shorting safeties? Late 1943? Or early 1944? I would think around the same time that Mauser started.

I have not yet seen or recorded a 1943 produced SC that had a milled safety . Every 1944 produced SC that I have seen and or recorded had a milled safety . I would not want say that 1943 SC could not or did not have milled safeties . I would say it maybe a possibility but I have yet to see a milled safety on a 1943 SC .

Also there not many surviving examples of either 43 or 44 to use for detailed study purposes .
 
I have not yet seen or recorded a 1943 produced SC that had a milled safety . Every 1944 produced SC that I have seen and or recorded had a milled safety . I would not want say that 1943 SC could not or did not have milled safeties . I would say it maybe a possibility but I have yet to see a milled safety on a 1943 SC .

Also there not many surviving examples of either 43 or 44 to use for detailed study purposes .

Possibly around the 1944 C block when the serial moved to barrel. Also, right around when a lot SC were built in the 1944 D block. More checkered butt plates and ect. Is when safeties got milled. Serial got moved because SC bases covered receivers? A guess for now concerning milled safety’s?
 
Last edited:
Possibly around the 1944 C block when the serial moved to barrel. Also, right around when a lot SC were built in the 1944 D block. More checkered butt plates and ect. Is when safeties got milled. Serial got moved because SC bases covered receivers? A guess for now concerning milled safety’s?

No. All manufactures moved serial number to the barrel around the same time. They were ordered to. And the numbered safeties likely started sooner (I would be willing to bet around the same time that Mauser and Sauer started). Here are some pictures of a B block with what appears to be a shortened safety.

13. 1944 B Block (2).jpg13. 1944 B Block (3).jpg13. 1944 B Block (4).jpg
 
I have not yet seen or recorded a 1943 produced SC that had a milled safety . Every 1944 produced SC that I have seen and or recorded had a milled safety . I would not want say that 1943 SC could not or did not have milled safeties . I would say it maybe a possibility but I have yet to see a milled safety on a 1943 SC .

Also there not many surviving examples of either 43 or 44 to use for detailed study purposes .

Dave, this brings ups another interesting question. What is the earliest Single Claw we have seen? I am curious to know when Marholdt started converting them.

Maybe Absolute has read in some of the original documents when Marholdt was contracted or received the first batch for conversion. I would guess that it was mid to late 1943. If that is the case then the OP's rifle is too early anyways (assuming it is from 1943, which it appears to be from these few pictures). But that is just a guess.

Great discussion guys. Love talking about Single Claws. I know Dave has to be excited!
 
It will be interesting to see if this sells, as it is for sale at a very high price - given the UK isn't a huge market for 'collectible' K98k's, even more so in the current Covid economic climate in the UK.

The dealer selling it believes its genuine, and is selling it on behalf of the estate of a deceased collector, so its not known how long this was in the collectors possession and what if any evidence there is to believe it to be the real thing.
 
It’s Mahrholdt with two H’s bruh. Here are a couple of pictures from 43 when they were bombed, one of the building itself and the other looking down Maria-Theresien-Straße from the other direction. I’m curious how early Georg might have in the documents. Probably purely coincidental but here’s a picture of military trucks out front in 1941.
 

Attachments

  • AE89FC61-832D-411B-B9BB-BBC0055C4393.jpg
    AE89FC61-832D-411B-B9BB-BBC0055C4393.jpg
    327.4 KB · Views: 57
  • 731E891B-FDAE-4F6E-AFB0-86002BB0773F.jpeg
    731E891B-FDAE-4F6E-AFB0-86002BB0773F.jpeg
    174.1 KB · Views: 55
  • ACB54310-7550-455A-80A5-7CBDD3AE73A6.jpeg
    ACB54310-7550-455A-80A5-7CBDD3AE73A6.jpeg
    247.3 KB · Views: 54
  • 8176949D-0EFD-4E61-8B6D-32FE72ED72B0.jpeg
    8176949D-0EFD-4E61-8B6D-32FE72ED72B0.jpeg
    95.7 KB · Views: 58
It will be interesting to see if this sells, as it is for sale at a very high price - given the UK isn't a huge market for 'collectible' K98k's, even more so in the current Covid economic climate in the UK.

The dealer selling it believes its genuine, and is selling it on behalf of the estate of a deceased collector, so its not known how long this was in the collectors possession and what if any evidence there is to believe it to be the real thing.

I knew I had seen that Fake SC before went and found the Dealer site last night that was selling it . For those who are interested , the pics are bit bigger and clarity of photos are a little better https://www.highwoodclassicarms.co.uk/Firerms For Sale/0013.htm
 
No. All manufactures moved serial number to the barrel around the same time. They were ordered to. And the numbered safeties likely started sooner (I would be willing to bet around the same time that Mauser and Sauer started). Here are some pictures of a B block with what appears to be a shortened safety.

View attachment 247932View attachment 247933View attachment 247934

Better pics of safety would certainly help clarify what type safety it sports .

The other thing I would ask to see is the WaAD36 Proof on this barrel , I would want to know if this is the original barrel . I say this because I have seen a few SC over the years that had Spandau Depot Proof on the Stock and of these SC they all had MM Rear Sights , but at that time I and many other were unaware of the WaAD36 Proof Mark , my point being was it only the Rear Sight that was swapped or the complete barrel. If that was the case would the Spandau depot had put the Serial Number on the Barrel . If not You may think your looking at a 1943 when it in fact it could have been a 1944 ???
 
Last edited:

Military Rifle Journal
Back
Top