1889 Spandau G. Mod 88. Thorn & #12 Rework (the case for depot sanding)

[mauser1908]

A contentious topic, happy to have sparked this conversation.

 

[joryfreeburg]

I have been thinking about this all day and have decided to put my 2 cents in. I believe that I can speak that most members here on this sight believe that this rifles stock was German depot sanded during WWII.

Sauer S/147K #6685 Magdeburg Rework

I know there are quite a few here that know I purchased this rifle from the other thread that was posted here in this forum. I really wanted to buy this rifle for two main reasons. I have never owned a K date before or a reworked K98K. This rifle covered two of my wants in one rifle. I am...

www.k98kforum.com

The original acceptance marks are still somewhat visible but the depot stamp is clearly defined non sanded….. Why was this stock sanded at the depot? None of us here can be certain, but this is clearly a case for German depot sanding.

Also what about all the converted Gew98 to 98m’s that have some of their imperial stamps sanded, Is that not an example of German inter war or wartime sanding?

1916 Mauser GEW 98m

Here are some pictures of my 1916 Mauser GEW 98m that I got at a farm auction, it is all matching except for the cleaning rod which is 35 instead of 65. Chuck

www.k98kforum.com

 

[chrisftk]

Edited to add the other thought I had, which escaped by the time I typed that diatribe. Are you sure it is sanded? Of course everyone is going to say, DUH! look at it. Seriously, I can't tell from your pictures. I've had numerous guns that at first glance, the vast majority of folks would say they were sanded. They weren't. They were horribly worn. I had an Argentine 1891 that was so worn, the band springs stood proud of the stock nearly their full width. The receiver was so worn that all of the markings were gone. One could argue that it was heavily sanded 80 years ago, and then 80 years of hard use gave it the appearance of being heavily worn. That is entirely true. It is hard to say for certain as much of what we do is speculation based on observation and experience.

Thanks for weighing in Nathaniel-- you provide an interesting theory-- here are (in my opinion) the "money shots" for this being sanded and later new stamps added.


You can see a totally obliterated keel acceptance with a crisp SN stamp, then the aforementioned over stamping. I don't think wear would be that way at all.

A contentious topic, happy to have sparked this conversation.

You know I like open, civil discourse! Not afraid to be wrong either. Some of our best material has come out of our chats like this.

The original acceptance marks are still somewhat visible but the depot stamp is clearly defined non sanded….. Why was this stock sanded at the depot? None of us here can be certain, but this is clearly a case for German depot sanding.

Also what about all the converted Gew98 to 98m’s that have some of their imperial stamps sanded, Is that not an example of German inter war or wartime sanding?

Thanks for weighing in Jory. 100% agree on your S147k. Different eras, but some of these practices had their roots in earlier periods.

 

[Fal Grunt]

https://www.k98kforum.com/threads/haenel-g98m.32164/

Above is my Haenel rework, I thought it was interesting due to apparently several reworks. Here are a couple more pictures, not much better, but maybe?

Worn, sanded, both? band springs stand proud, recoil lug discs stand proud, but most edges that are not exposed to direct wear are sharp. The dents/dings/scratches are all after whatever refinish. Barreled receiver, trigger guard, and sling swivel are still recessed, which tells me if material was removed it was on the sides, not the bottom. The imperial acceptance stamps are faint, barely visible.

If I harken back to my days in geology the laws of superposition tell me that the stock was worn, maybe sanded, refinished at least twice, once to lessen the imperial acceptance stamps, once to lessen the weimar stamps, with the majority of large dents, dings and scrapes, marks that would have been still evident after a light sanding, leaving the Nazi Hz 8 marking still fairly crisp.

 

[mauser1908]

I've reflected on this most of the day in a bit more depth than my smart-aleck response above would lend. I think Chris' point is being misconstrued, I don't believe he was indicating that the purpose of period sanding was to destroy the acceptance so new stamps could be applied. I think the reasons behind this process are more substantive than that.

I believe that sanding occurred for two reasons. First, repairs (splices, plugs, etc). Second, cleaning (gasp). The extent to which these techniques were applied was likely multifactorial. The primary factor being the year in which the service was performed. It's likely that there is a substantial difference in technique and application year over year. In other words, weapons reworked in 1914-1916 were more crude than those done in 1917 and beyond. Going off receiver date, reworked weapons from 1916 and '17 to a rifle, are far more sophisticated than their earlier cousins. It's evident that the only hard and fast rule early on was renumbering the bolt. Back to sanding, the extent to which a weapon was sanded would have been based on what depot supervisors felt necessary at the time, full stop. Repairs are an obvious reason for sanding, every period repair I've encountered warranted the whole stock getting scraped, I don't know why this was the case, I can only offer what I've observed. With that said, in the case of repairs; I think the likely cause for sanding the entire stock is related to reason two, which is cleaning. I think stock maintenance via sanding or scraping happened more than we grant credence. Per Storz, these weapons were collected off the battlefield following engagements or in rear areas and casualty clearing stations as men rotated off the line. I think we would be remiss to discount the brutality in which this war was conducted and its impact on these weapons and the men that carried them. I don't believe sanding for the purpose of cleaning is a radical proposition; especially when these rifle were collected with grime, mud, and biological material from the prior owner on them. Sanding to remove it seems logical.

To look at Chris' rifle, I see no reason why it wouldn't be the case. I think we're also discounting the critical role the Gew88 played in 1914-1916 during the weapons shortage period. To assume this was a second line weapon is akin to positing ersatz bayonets and slings were too. It was simply not the case. I could see this rework occurring post 1916, as it's quite sophisticated. This whole topic requires more advanced study; timelines based on when receiver dates would help pin down when these occurred.

 

[chrisftk]

I think Chris' point is being misconstrued, I don't believe he was indicating that the purpose of period sanding was to destroy the acceptance so new stamps could be applied. I think the reasons behind this process are more substantive than that.

100% I was not implying that the sanding was to pave the way for new marks. The two things are mutually exclusive. I'm just using the crisp new marks over old sanded ones as evidence the sanding wasn't postwar bubba.

Thanks for the excellent points Sam (and everyone else)

 

[Cyrano4747]

Unless the South Americans were sheltering a team of refugee imperial inspectors I don't think they were the ones that sanded the stock in this case. Again, why is there a new wrist acceptance stamped over an old sanded one?

Perhaps a silly question, but how confident are we that the overstamps are genuine? I've seen enough """restored""" stampings on K98k and Garand stocks that it’s where my brain goes when I start squinting at stamps that have something odd going on.

To my mind the weird placement and lack of any obvious profit motive argue against them being fake (I’d be more suspicious is it was nice, clean imperial cyphers over old for example) but the thought occurred.

 

[mauser1908]

Perhaps a silly question, but how confident are we that the overstamps are genuine? I've seen enough """restored""" stampings on K98k and Garand stocks that it’s where my brain goes when I start squinting at stamps that have something odd going on.

To my mind the weird placement and lack of any obvious profit motive argue against them being fake (I’d be more suspicious is it was nice, clean imperial cyphers over old for example) but the thought occurred.

I can’t speak to over-stamping buttstock acceptance on gew88s. From my understanding, the Bavarians did do this. I can speak to Gew 98s. They’re almost always done in the same fashion as Chris’ rifle, a counter stuck wrist. For example, Spandau often used Amberg manufactured stocks. The wrist was originally struck C/A then counter struck C/Z when it was mated to the rifle. There are fake stamps out there, which are somewhat convincing, but the fakers still don’t understand how they were applied. So those guns look pretty radioactive. Also, these stamps are no different from Waffenamp inspection stamps, albeit specific characters are tied to a team rather than a number being tied to a factory. The fakers will never get this correct. They might catch a new collector, but a couple years of reading on this forum is all someone needs to escape that.

Edit: I should say that stamps were still tied to teams in the NS era but the number was tied to the factory. The fraktur was tied to the inspector’s surname in this era, which is there’s so much variation.

 

[chrisftk]

Perhaps a silly question, but how confident are we that the overstamps are genuine? I've seen enough """restored""" stampings on K98k and Garand stocks that it’s where my brain goes when I start squinting at stamps that have something odd going on.

To my mind the weird placement and lack of any obvious profit motive argue against them being fake (I’d be more suspicious is it was nice, clean imperial cyphers over old for example) but the thought occurred.

Yeah, it never hurts to play devil's advocate and as the question, but these stamps are 100% real in my opinion.

To Sam's point-- even if you have a decent fake stamp, they are usually pretty ineptly applied. (My favorite being the double cypher-- or lack of cypher. There was one where the guy stamped a c/R in the cypher spot) Clearly made during the reign of Kaiser Ralph)

 

[OnlyMil]

This is one hot topic. Sorry to be late to the party! Nothing to contribute but my fascination. I hope bubba isn't here taking notes!!!

 

[Cyrano4747]

Edit: I should say that stamps were still tied to teams in the NS era but the number was tied to the factory. The fraktur was tied to the inspector’s surname in this era, which is there’s so much variation.

The stamps were still tied to teams in the NS era, but the teams were assigned long-term to specific factories. The number itself wasn't tied to a specific factory, although they tended to stay put. This is why the e/63 stamp starts at Mauser Oberndorf and gets moved to Brunn in late 1939 - the team was transferred, presumably as part of the effort to bring in subject matter experts to get the factory up to speed on manufacturing for the Reich (similar to how they brought in advisors from Steyr, plus shipped over some parts).

 

[mauser1908]

The stamps were still tied to teams in the NS era, but the teams were assigned long-term to specific factories. The number itself wasn't tied to a specific factory, although they tended to stay put. This is why the e/63 stamp starts at Mauser Oberndorf and gets moved to Brunn in late 1939 - the team was transferred, presumably as part of the effort to bring in subject matter experts to get the factory up to speed on manufacturing for the Reich (similar to how they brought in advisors from Steyr, plus shipped over some parts).

Great info, thanks for sharing. The NS period is not my strong suit.

 

[Loewe]

Added to the study, very nice rifle and an excellent discussion!