Third Party Press

98M 17/20 Danzig.

fireman

Senior Member
I picked this one up recently. I know almost nothing about 98m's or interwar guns. I only have owned one other that I sold to Paul S. so I could use some schooling on it.

1917 Danzig, 1920 dated also.

Matching rebuild but the bolt is not m/m.

Stock and some small parts are renumbered to the action.

No S/42 on the rear sight. I thought they all had that?

I'm not sure what this mark is that is upside down from the rest of the markings?

Any info or help would be appreciated.

Forgot to add that the sling is original.

thanks
 

Attachments

  • image000000 (13).jpg
    image000000 (13).jpg
    61.8 KB · Views: 51
  • image000007.jpg
    image000007.jpg
    90.1 KB · Views: 51
  • image000008 (1).jpg
    image000008 (1).jpg
    65.9 KB · Views: 53
  • image000001 (4).jpg
    image000001 (4).jpg
    81.4 KB · Views: 52
  • image000002 (4).jpg
    image000002 (4).jpg
    51.2 KB · Views: 55
  • image000000 (12).jpg
    image000000 (12).jpg
    196.2 KB · Views: 54
  • image000003 (8).jpg
    image000003 (8).jpg
    113.2 KB · Views: 56
  • image000009 (1).jpg
    image000009 (1).jpg
    81.3 KB · Views: 62
  • image000005 (3).jpg
    image000005 (3).jpg
    63.7 KB · Views: 60
  • image000006.jpg
    image000006.jpg
    38.5 KB · Views: 58
  • image000004 (4).jpg
    image000004 (4).jpg
    73.1 KB · Views: 49
Last edited:
Rich(?); You are an old hand and know we need more pictures, -the serial would be most helpful too but at least the suffix is needed.

Looks like the original barrel, - you show the stock re-serialing but the markings shown lacks context, - do the wrist markings (small of stock); RS sleeves typically help date a broad period of when work might have been done (can be Simson, WMO, or a few other rarer possibilities - S/42 is probably most common and generally dates to the height of rearmament begun in 1934 - Hitler did not start rearmament, modest steps and the first large appropriations were passed before Hitler, even before 1931 at the height of the chaos Germany refused to shutdown its ship building program, all under great pressure from Hoover, the French and English)

Show the stock markings clearly as possible, - that the RR and RS components are not reacceptance and not S/42 parts indicates earlier work, at least more likely, as youare correct S/42 variants are next to universal in the first large-substantial rearmament programs designed to upgrade current inventories of rifles onhand 1933-1936.

***property marked (1920) generally have the earlier upgrade RS components and often earlier indications of pre-1933 work because having the 1920 property marking means is was in hand in 1920 and official government property, they are far more likely to have seen earlier work and less likely to have WMO (S/42) components.
 
Opps... Simson would not have done any upgrades or work on rifles, above might suggest this, but Simson did supply components to ordnance depots. They supplied parts and finished rifles and as stated earlier was deemed to expensive for upgrade work or conversions. Simson was a mfg of rifles and components.
 
Good morning Paul,

Yes, I do plan some better pictures. I had some time yesterday to be in the shop but the rain kept me from doing nice outdoor pictures. Hopefully today I can get better ones. However, I'm not sure if the wrist ones will be any better. That area is pretty beat up. I will try though.

Any idea on the upside down BI? 459?

It does make sense that this was an earlier rework, being a 1920 gun.

Pictures as soon as I can do it w/o the rains.

Rich
 
I thought it were you! Been a decade or more!

BI - Bismarckhutte (steel maker)
459 - the lot

It does have some utility in trends work and is clear evidence of originality (factory state-origin) but barrel coding is far more useful in 1934-44 production, in some (many) cases you can determine maker date with the barrel alone. This is potentially true in Imperial and Republic era, but less accurate, but the broad circumstances (probable maker, date range "most likely") can be guessed at accurately.

**never mind the rifle, just check in once in awhile! We need good collectors like you here!
 
Hi Paul, yup it's me. Thanks for the encouragement. I've been kinda of hanging on the fringes for a while. Life is slowing down so I should be around more.

Here are some more pics of the rifle. Barrel is original matching. I think the TG is also. Certainly #'s match and Imperial proofed.

image000002 (9).jpgimage000000 (15).jpgimage000003 (10).jpgimage000000 (17).jpgimage000002 (10).jpgimage000004 (6).jpg
image000006 (2).jpgimage000001 (6).jpg
 
Interesting stock, possibly the original one although I can't be sure with these pictures... looks the right features and acceptance for the range but trends are scanty to be sure. I lean original stock but certainly similar to what it would have had originally (it is common for the original stock serial to be reapplied in this period)

I can say for sure that the property stamp (1920) would have been applied to the left buttstock if so but I can't tell in this case from these pictures & damage. The RS is probably early postwar components, not Simson for sure, but going from 20 years recollection, JS said WMO supplied early components for RS upgrades, this probably before Simson navigated its position as sole small arms supplier in the mid-20's (which caused so such much heartburn with her competitors-especially her reported French connections).

Anyway, the stock probably holds the answers but the low quality pictures and damage prevents a "confident" assessment, - but in the end such things are too convoluted to qualify as certainties or facts, best to call them informed guesses which are probable or few would dispute for the alternatives are even more convoluted!
 
BTW, can you make out the waffenamts on the rear sight, almost for sure a subsequent upgrade, mostly I am curious if Simson or later, - I do not desire turning this away from the rifle or get too far afield into pure speculation, but early upgrades like this are rare to survive and rearsight modifications are not completely clear in my mind (and unfortunately the most informed on the subject can be disagreeable "teachers or educators", but my field or method is more analytical and not scientific with a clear understanding of ballistics. I am a reader, a pencil pushing organizer relying on interpretation rather than hard mathematical facts... basically dealing in contextual probabilities...)
 
Hey Rich was wondering how we’re gonna square up on that sling since there was no mention of it not being included and all photos showed the rifle with the sling and it was also noted the sling being original.
 
Last edited:

Military Rifle Journal
Back
Top