1914 Commercial WMO Danzig Rework

[chrisftk]

I was fortunate enough to get another neat rifle from Mike. This is one is pretty unusual.

The base rifle is a commercial 1914 WMO that was somehow put in military hands. I am not sure what the story is, but I think possibly a Wehrmann gewehr in 8x57 that was comandeered at the factory or donated to the military. At some point, the rifle was reworked at Danzig and rebarreled. An added acceptance on the right receiver signifies this. The acceptance on the new barrel matched Sam's 1918 Danzig, so this would appear to be a pretty late depot rebuild.

In addition, the trigger guard and floor plate were renumbered to match. The front band matches, but the rear band is an armorer spare, as is the follower. The stock was not renumbered, nor was the handguard but instead of a depot number, there is a large capital "D" on the buttplate, which I believe signifies the Danzig reworking. There is also an added Danzig acceptance to the wrist of the stock. The preponderance of the rest of the parts is m/m, excepting the bolt stop and trigger sear. The bolt is likely one that was randomly paired with it after capture.

The rifle presents well and appears to be untouched since the war. In any case, this is a variant not often encountered. Any thoughts or theories contrary to my guesses are certainly welcome.

 

[chrisftk]

more pics...

 

[joryfreeburg]

Cool rifle Chris… unique pickup

 

[RyanE]

Very weird rebuild. My kind of gun. Being a 1914, I agree with you that it was probably taken into Imperial service at the factory. As I'm sure you know, that happened a lot in both Germany and Austria-Hungary in 1914.

Question: is it just me, or is that fireproof on the barrel really unusual? Seems way more detailed than normal?

 

[chrisftk]

Very weird rebuild. My kind of gun. Being a 1914, I agree with you that it was probably taken into Imperial service at the factory. As I'm sure you know, that happened a lot in both Germany and Austria-Hungary in 1914.

Question: is it just me, or is that fireproof on the barrel really unusual? Seems way more detailed than normal?

Thanks Ryan, this one definitely piqued my interest when Mike showed it to me.

I think the fireproof looks ok, Cyrus and I were discussing this topic a week or so ago There seems to be a wide variance with how these end up looking on Danzigs. The style of eagle changes slightly even within short periods of time-- there wasn't an abrupt one-time shift in proof style like Amberg's standing vs. kneeling lion.

 

[feldmütze]

Great theory Chris, very credible. That one has an interesting history.

 

[mauser1908]

Chris, this is a really cool one, we learn more and more about the depot system every time one of these surfaces. I think you're right that this is a late Danzig build. It seems that Danzig abandoned the '1' as their rework indicator in favor of 'D', at least at the end.

To my eye, I perceive the barrel acceptance to be fraktur 'D'. Regardless of what it actually is, this character became the norm from the 'W' block in 1917 through 1918. So we can say pretty reasonably this is from 1917 or 18 at a minimum. Prior to the 'W' block, it seems they used a few different characters 'G' being one of them. Like you said, mine is KR 52A (note A under suffix a) so I think you're totally correct to think KR 90A would also be 1918.

Stock: The addition of the C/M on the wrist is totally Danzig, like you mention. C/M appear as early as the no suffix block in 1916 and seems to be the only inspector for stock manufacture by 1917 and 18.

Very weird rebuild. My kind of gun. Being a 1914, I agree with you that it was probably taken into Imperial service at the factory. As I'm sure you know, that happened a lot in both Germany and Austria-Hungary in 1914.

Question: is it just me, or is that fireproof on the barrel really unusual? Seems way more detailed than normal?

Ryan, you're right, it is different. Like Chris mentioned, Danzig probably had the most variance year over year with all their markings. The eagle on WMO 1914 78563 is still in the Danzig style. After looking at Chris' other late Danzig build (1901 WMO), I noticed the proof is identical. This makes me think Danzig was just using a minutely different die for their rework facility.

Production Danzig FP, BC, and Acceptance: Danzig 1918 4928a



Danzig Rework FP: WMO 1901 353a




Danzig Rework FP: WMO 1914 78563

 

[chrisftk]

Great theory Chris, very credible. That one has an interesting history.

Thanks Mike! I appreciate you passing it along to my care. It's a unique rifle for sure.

Chris, this is a really cool one, we learn more and more about the depot system every time one of these surfaces. I think you're right that this is a late Danzig build. It seems that Danzig abandoned the '1' as their rework indicator in favor of 'D', at least at the end.

To my eye, I perceive the barrel acceptance to be fraktur 'D'. Regardless of what it actually is, this character became the norm from the 'W' block in 1917 through 1918. So we can say pretty reasonably this is from 1917 or 18 at a minimum. Prior to the 'W' block, it seems they used a few different characters 'G' being one of them. Like you said, mine is KR 52A (note A under suffix a) so I think you're totally correct to think KR 90A would also be 1918.

Stock: The addition of the C/M on the wrist is totally Danzig, like you mention. C/M appear as early as the no suffix block in 1916 and seems to be the only inspector for stock manufacture by 1917 and 18.


Ryan, you're right, it is different. Like Chris mentioned, Danzig probably had the most variance year over year with all their markings. The eagle on WMO 1914 78563 is still in the Danzig style. After looking at Chris' other late Danzig build (1901 WMO), I noticed the proof is identical. This makes me think Danzig was just using a minutely different die for their rework facility.

Production Danzig FP, BC, and Acceptance: Danzig 1918 4928a

View attachment 310493View attachment 310494

Danzig Rework FP: WMO 1901 353a

View attachment 310495


Danzig Rework FP: WMO 1914 78563

View attachment 310496

Sam-- thanks for the detailed analysis and for being a great sounding board on these oddball rifles.

 

[Fal Grunt]

Very cool rifle, thanks for sharing it!

 

[chrisftk]

Very cool rifle, thanks for sharing it!

Thanks! Do you agree with my assertion that it was likely a wehrmann that was purchased at the factory and put into service?

 

[Fal Grunt]

Thanks! Do you agree with my assertion that it was likely a wehrmann that was purchased at the factory and put into service?

It's impossible to say for certain, but it is a good theory. It could have been a commercial Gewehr 98 or a Wehrmannsgewehr. I had typed of a longer response initially but it is such a pieced together rifle it is hard to really say. I certainly agree it looks to be a rifle put together from the pieces of several other rifles. I have seen other Wehrmannsgewehr in that general serial number range.

I think what troubles me or gives me pause is the receiver. Generally speaking receivers like this one, WFM roll marked, Gew 98, commercial proofed, in that serial number range, are usually considered commercial rifles built post war using left over Gew 98 receivers. So to see a rifle built (albeit a parts rifle in essence) during the war, using one of these receivers raises some questions.

I'm not in the shop today so I can't look at my reference files to pull up similar serial numbers and compare. I will email Jon though because I am curious his thoughts. Maybe it isn't as complicated as I am making it out to be.

 

[chrisftk]

It's impossible to say for certain, but it is a good theory. It could have been a commercial Gewehr 98 or a Wehrmannsgewehr. I had typed of a longer response initially but it is such a pieced together rifle it is hard to really say. I certainly agree it looks to be a rifle put together from the pieces of several other rifles. I have seen other Wehrmannsgewehr in that general serial number range.

I think what troubles me or gives me pause is the receiver. Generally speaking receivers like this one, WFM roll marked, Gew 98, commercial proofed, in that serial number range, are usually considered commercial rifles built post war using left over Gew 98 receivers. So to see a rifle built (albeit a parts rifle in essence) during the war, using one of these receivers raises some questions.

I'm not in the shop today so I can't look at my reference files to pull up similar serial numbers and compare. I will email Jon though because I am curious his thoughts. Maybe it isn't as complicated as I am making it out to be.

So the Danzig Depot work done to it certainly clouds things. It was rebarreled too, which doesn't help.

I'm 99% confident in the fact it passed through Danzig late war (1918 if barrel acceptance is to be believed), but what it was before prior is an enigma.

 

[Loewe]

Chris, this is a really cool one, we learn more and more about the depot system every time one of these surfaces. I think you're right that this is a late Danzig build. It seems that Danzig abandoned the '1' as their rework indicator in favor of 'D', at least at the end.

To my eye, I perceive the barrel acceptance to be fraktur 'D'. Regardless of what it actually is, this character became the norm from the 'W' block in 1917 through 1918. So we can say pretty reasonably this is from 1917 or 18 at a minimum. Prior to the 'W' block, it seems they used a few different characters 'G' being one of them. Like you said, mine is KR 52A (note A under suffix a) so I think you're totally correct to think KR 90A would also be 1918.

Stock: The addition of the C/M on the wrist is totally Danzig, like you mention. C/M appear as early as the no suffix block in 1916 and seems to be the only inspector for stock manufacture by 1917 and 18.


Ryan, you're right, it is different. Like Chris mentioned, Danzig probably had the most variance year over year with all their markings. The eagle on WMO 1914 78563 is still in the Danzig style. After looking at Chris' other late Danzig build (1901 WMO), I noticed the proof is identical. This makes me think Danzig was just using a minutely different die for their rework facility.

Production Danzig FP, BC, and Acceptance: Danzig 1918 4928a

View attachment 310493View attachment 310494

Danzig Rework FP: WMO 1901 353a

View attachment 310495


Danzig Rework FP: WMO 1914 78563

View attachment 310496

This is great work, exactly what this forum is all about, yesterday I had the time to look at this rifle (Mike's old pictures and these) and this was my conclusion also...


This rifle is circa 1917 due to the barrel and acceptance/FP pattern; as Chris said C/D (often RR in diverse patterns) is very common and a Danzig association is almost certain. But here the Krupp barrel is good clue to date it, as is the FP, this is generally 1917 for Danzig, - Danzig dod not use many Krupp barrels, not at all, but every war year (15-17) some have been observed, but few generally.

I think this C/D might be a separate line of activity but tied to Danzig oversite. They were very active and they are not uncommon for reworked rifles but the variables can be different, but that is very typical of wartime reworks (actually reworks - re-barrels in general regardless of year 1915-1918 - even the republic)

Great job all! I once had an advantage in this sort of thing, but i can see that Chris, Sam, Cyrus, Jordan have little to learn from me these days!

 

[chrisftk]

This is great work, exactly what this forum is all about, yesterday I had the time to look at this rifle (Mike's old pictures and these) and this was my conclusion also...


This rifle is circa 1917 due to the barrel and acceptance/FP pattern; as Chris said C/D (often RR in diverse patterns) is very common and a Danzig association is almost certain. But here the Krupp barrel is good clue to date it, as is the FP, this is generally 1917 for Danzig, - Danzig dod not use many Krupp barrels, not at all, but every war year (15-17) some have been observed, but few generally.

I think this C/D might be a separate line of activity but tied to Danzig oversite. They were very active and they are not uncommon for reworked rifles but the variables can be different, but that is very typical of wartime reworks (actually reworks - re-barrels in general regardless of year 1915-1918 - even the republic)

Great job all! I once had an advantage in this sort of thing, but i can see that Chris, Sam, Cyrus, Jordan have little to learn from me these days!

Thanks Paul, a lot of these Danzig rebuilds have popped up, so it's a good sample size. I do feel like there was some sort of side line operation for recycled builds. I own three of these and all have a rebarrel and are new rifles built with salvage /Armorer's spares very much akin to Hannover.

I appreciate the kind words as well, but for the record, I still think you have plenty to teach us!

 

[mauser1908]

This is great work, exactly what this forum is all about, yesterday I had the time to look at this rifle (Mike's old pictures and these) and this was my conclusion also...


This rifle is circa 1917 due to the barrel and acceptance/FP pattern; as Chris said C/D (often RR in diverse patterns) is very common and a Danzig association is almost certain. But here the Krupp barrel is good clue to date it, as is the FP, this is generally 1917 for Danzig, - Danzig dod not use many Krupp barrels, not at all, but every war year (15-17) some have been observed, but few generally.

I think this C/D might be a separate line of activity but tied to Danzig oversite. They were very active and they are not uncommon for reworked rifles but the variables can be different, but that is very typical of wartime reworks (actually reworks - re-barrels in general regardless of year 1915-1918 - even the republic)

Great job all! I once had an advantage in this sort of thing, but i can see that Chris, Sam, Cyrus, Jordan have little to learn from me these days!

Thank you for the kind words Paul, I agree with Chris we still have much to learn from you. I think you guys are on to something with this Danzig rework activity. They seem to be much more involved than the traditional number depots.

 

[PrayingMantis]

Great job all! I once had an advantage in this sort of thing, but i can see that Chris, Sam, Cyrus, Jordan have little to learn from me these days!

Stop, you're making me blush.

Seriously, i appreciate it, Paul. We've all learned a lot from each other and along with each other here, but it started with you and your observations.

 

[PrayingMantis]

Chris, this has so much in common with my 1914 Danzig: https://www.k98kforum.com/threads/gewehr-98-danzig-1914-2370a-y-rework.43730/

and Don's: https://www.k98kforum.com/threads/dwm-1915-depot-build.51251/

And even your 1901 WMO: https://www.k98kforum.com/threads/late-war-danzig-build.46059/

The c/D acceptance and assembly numbers on barrel and receiver are consistent on all of these late Danzig reworks.