Totally agree, Cyrus. Glad you brought this up. It just seems slimy and it undermines the actual purpose of the forum. Moreover, half the time these sellers aren’t even correct on the restatement of the information used in the ad. The whole reading comprehension thing really throws them.
Thank you, Chris. Hopefully additional examples surface. Does this bear assembly numbered?
Thanks you! I cleaned this one considerably with bronze wool, which is why it looks better. It’s not the first Kiautschou marked gun that’s accounted for but probably the first posted here. Odds are it...
While not conventionally accepted, per se; I would posit it confirms suitability to be used to fill an order for a Scharfschutzengewehr. Not necessarily just for the Glasvisier 16.
Hi All, I’m pretty excited to have finally checked naval gewehr off my list. This one seems to bear a pretty obscure unit making; KU which represents Kiautschou. It basically had everyone stumped but Chris had a contact that’s highly specialized in Naval and Marine unit markings that identified...
Nice late Amberg, Hale! Finish looks like Kronegrund/Kronenol, which is why I believe it’s so dark. Very uncharacteristic for Amberg in 1917. Jaeger’s protocol wasn’t officially approved until early 1918, but it has been observed multiple times on late 1917 dated guns.
Cyrus, what a set! I didn’t originally notice the bayonet was so close in number to the rifle. You seem to be a magnet for like kind bayonets. I really enjoy the naval specific features of these early pre spitzer rifles, like the full sn on the rear sight, etc. I’ll eventually make it to one of...