Interesting late Mauser K block not maker marked

jack944

jack944

Senior Member
Interesting late Mauser K block not maker marked just sold....

www.legacy-collectibles.com

SOLD - Interesting 1944 Mauser K98k - No Factory Code

3/19/25 - For sale is a K98k that was made by Mauser in late 1944. There is no maker stamp on the receiver but the rifle is stamped with Eagle/135 throughout. We estimate it as a late 1944 manufacture as the right side of the receiver is stamped with two Eagle/135 stamps. The metal has a dark...
www.legacy-collectibles.com www.legacy-collectibles.com
 
Funny stuff. Serial number is 43914k and no s/n on the barrel:

1742422622430.png

This one 53152k has the s/n on the barrel:
www.k98kforum.com

Bucket list item, byf44 high turret sniper

I was lucky enough to hunt this one down. I’ve been looking for awhile and finally the stars aligned. Thanks to Hercules and Dave R for answering a ton of questions. And thanks to Dave G for selling me the nice Ajack scope. I think it’s a really nice match for the rifle.
www.k98kforum.com www.k98kforum.com
 
Guillaume d'Orange said:
Funny stuff. Serial number is 43914k and no s/n on the barrel:

View attachment 435107

This one 53152k has the s/n on the barrel:
www.k98kforum.com

Bucket list item, byf44 high turret sniper

I was lucky enough to hunt this one down. I’ve been looking for awhile and finally the stars aligned. Thanks to Hercules and Dave R for answering a ton of questions. And thanks to Dave G for selling me the nice Ajack scope. I think it’s a really nice match for the rifle.
www.k98kforum.com www.k98kforum.com
Click to expand...
Late ‘K’ block the SN was moved from barrel to receiver. Along with that turrets that had a receiver SN in that range had SN added to barrel.

SN placement on Legacy gun is 100% where it should be.
 
This makes 3 total that I am aware of. The images below are of the earliest I am aware of.
This 'a' block and a 2nd 'k' block that just sold, along with another 'k' block.
 

Attachments

  • 20250319_195815lr.jpg
    20250319_195815lr.jpg
    219.4 KB · Views: 38
  • 20250319lr.jpg
    20250319lr.jpg
    210.7 KB · Views: 38
  • boltsn lr.jpg
    boltsn lr.jpg
    286.7 KB · Views: 38
bruce98k said:
This makes 3 total that I am aware of. The images below are of the earliest I am aware of.
This 'a' block and a 2nd 'k' block that just sold, along with another 'k' block.
Click to expand...
Any thoughts on the 'why'? This seems beyond just a simple error.
 
heavy_mech said:
Any thoughts on the 'why'? This seems beyond just a simple error.
Click to expand...
Perhaps the dies to stamp « byf 44 » were simply not usable.
They produced a bit less than 2000 rifles per day on average. Would you stop the whole production for this detail ?
By the way, this is an operation they could have removed : you could identify the maker with the WaA stamp.
 
bruce98k said:
This makes 3 total that I am aware of. The images below are of the earliest I am aware of.
This 'a' block and a 2nd 'k' block that just sold, along with another 'k' block.
Click to expand...
Bruce do you have pics of the other k block? Is the receiver finished as nicely as the 'a' block or is it more rough like the recently sold 'k' block?
 
Guillaume d'Orange said:
Perhaps the dies to stamp « byf 44 » were simply not usable.
They produced a bit less than 2000 rifles per day on average. Would you stop the whole production for this detail ?
By the way, this is an operation they could have removed : you could identify the maker with the WaA stamp.
Click to expand...
WaA was assigned to an inspector (or inspection team? can't remember), not a factory. E.g. you see WaA 63 shift from Oberndorf to Brunn in 1940.

edit: which isn't to say that you couldn't figure it out. Obviously the Germans knew what factory a given WaA was assigned to at what time. But it's not as clean and clear cut an indicator as having a dedicated factory code on the rifle.
 
The first 'k' block which I have is not polished, just like the one at Legacy.
It is in all respects a late "k' block just without the 'byf 44' roll mark.

It could have been a simple process error or perhaps the die change required more time but in the end who knows.
I believe these are the only known factory production rifles without a code roll mark.

But as we all know, more unique examples will continue to fall out as the years go by.

Who knows, someone could uncover another 'BSW 1936' - that would be the day!
 
So based on the receivers being polished and not polished, it’s possible that whatever caused the roll mark to be omitted happened at least twice during production. Once early on then again later.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top