CE marked receiver
- Thread starter new guy mike
- Start date
heavy_mech
RKI- Reasonably Knowledgable Individual
Well if the stock date is March 10th, then it can't be 'early'. I thought maybe what's under the serial number was a suffix, possibly partial or misstamp but I can't make anything of it.
new guy mike
Active member
There is no serial number on the barrel. There are matching serial numbers on the front sling swivel, barrel band, rear sight group, receiver, magazine floor plate, sear, lower receiver, and bolt.
Cyrano4747
Well-known member
Pics are worth a thousand words. Get pictures of all the markings on all the metal you can. If you've already got the bbl out of the stock that will help a lot in getting good, clear photos.
Mauserguy85
Well-known member
I could never understand why new members don’t post enough pics, but at the same time want detailed info about their rifle. You’re asking for help from some of the top k98k experts in the world, but aren’t complying with the request of pics. In order to make accurate judgements and assessments, we need to see detailed and many photos of all the serials, markings, etc.
JP Sauer was during this time period, a very interesting assembler of k98ks. A lot of “variation” and oddities are out there.
JP Sauer was during this time period, a very interesting assembler of k98ks. A lot of “variation” and oddities are out there.
heavy_mech
RKI- Reasonably Knowledgable Individual
Looking for the barrel code or the stock channel? He's got the barrel code pics in post #13. Script ce, D and e/37 x 2.
Also I notice it a 'straight script' rollmark and that it's a Feima supplied receiver which start to show up in the g block of '42.
heavy_mech
RKI- Reasonably Knowledgable Individual
In checking the stock date code I find Feb produced stocks in the g and h blocks and March produced (as this stock is) in the o block.
Cyrano4747
Well-known member
Missed that, thanks.
Mauserguy85
Well-known member
Any possibility it’s a “h” or maybe 
“r” block? JPS had a tendency to really polish the parts after stamping. The firing proof is not deep like most examples and I think it may be due to a combination of maybe a worn out die and a lot of polishing….
*Pic of the handwritten Sauer fonts by Mr Farb from a post a while back.
“r” block? JPS had a tendency to really polish the parts after stamping. The firing proof is not deep like most examples and I think it may be due to a combination of maybe a worn out die and a lot of polishing….*Pic of the handwritten Sauer fonts by Mr Farb from a post a while back.
Attachments
Last edited:
heavy_mech
RKI- Reasonably Knowledgable Individual
Well looking at the photos of the letters in the bible, the r does have the same slant and flares the same towards the base. It would obviously be missing a fair bit of the top portion, but a partial isn't something that's unheard of.Any possibility it’s a “h” or maybe
*Pic of the handwritten Sauer fonts by Mr Farb from a post a while back.
Mauserguy85
Well-known member
Yup If I had to bet, my money would be on a “r” block in which the letter suffix die was hit in a manner that the bottom exhibited more pressure on the metal. Than came in JP Sauer’s trademark polishing process and I think that’s were we are at. Now does that letter suffix line up with the stock dates? I’m not sure and must defer to others.
There is no question that this receiver received a “very good polishing”. I have a ce42 “o” block that exhibits a similar final finish. Will try and post it later tonight after work.
OP, get them pics up. We would like to see more. Don’t be lazy
There is no question that this receiver received a “very good polishing”. I have a ce42 “o” block that exhibits a similar final finish. Will try and post it later tonight after work.
OP, get them pics up. We would like to see more. Don’t be lazy
Last edited:
new guy mike
Active member
Here are more pics. The pics I’ve previously supplied are of as much of the marked metal as possible. There aren’t a lot of markings.
Attachments
Mauserguy85
Well-known member
Does the bolt match or is it a bolt mismatch? Is the follower unmarked? How is the bore on it? I like it btw. Very nice and cool to see the “transition” during this time frame.
new guy mike
Active member
The bore is very nice, good lands and grooves. The follower does not have any markings on the top; but I double check the bottom and post pics if there are any markings. The bolt has matching numbers.
new guy mike
Active member
Same sitrep, the receiver has a suffix but it is indiscernible... the barrel code is not likely very early production. I only posted to see if a probability is possible with more details.
The BC narrows the range only in that it eliminates very early production, I too supposed from the partial suffix that r-block was probable but comparisons were not definitive... I haven;t gone through the new pics yet but that was the purpose I intended to see if further narrowing is possible.
Close comparisons suggest p-block imo, not 100% but r-block do not compare well... if the bolt is original then pictures of that seems a no-brainer to say the least, the suffix in this range is only on the bolt & receiver.
**or do you mean the bolt is matching to itself but not to the receiver?
**or do you mean the bolt is matching to itself but not to the receiver?
