Loewe 1890 Gew.88- Nazi Marked

[Loewe]

Some thoughts from another collector who I respect highly- good point too...

Paul: Probably the best reason to doubt an ’88 was in German service post 1930 or so is the fact that while the ’88 could safely fire the old ww1 light spitzer bullet load (154 gr weight) the same is not true for the longer boattail sS and SmE types that were universally in German service from about 1930 on. A pretty good way to maybe ruin one’s left hand via an exploding barrel.

 

[krukster86]

I don’t have much of a dog in this fight and have been watching on the sidelines. From a Polish rifle perspective, I have seen a tabulation in a Polish reference that in 1939, Poland had in its inventory 19,300 Gew.88’s and Gew.88/05’s (grouped together) used by the forestry service, prison guards, and the Polish national railway guards.

I am used to seeing the Polish eagle proof on stocks on military issued rifles (after adoption of the Mauser 98 pattern standard) which does not look like the one on this rifle in question. However, since I have not ever seen a pre-1922 “Polish” rifle (back when they had a melting pot of various stuff from all over Europe) in person, nor any rifle that was not issued to the military, I personally cannot claim one way or another that this is or isn’t some sort of odd Polish proof (i.e. a very early one or a non-military one).

 

[Bigdibbs88]

Paul- I can respect you POV, but respectfully disagree as all points you have made are plausibly refutable. I had mentioned in my initial post that this rifle has already been posted with mixed reviews, and yes I bought it from mike who I’m friends with who got it for $250 at a show setup. That’s the extent of the chain since surfacing for nothing. I certainly dont expect everyone to like it, just wanted to get some better pics out there.

I have to say it’s a bit disappointing that you think all of the eagles are bad simply because they haven’t been seen before, youve been around long enough to see swjXE’s and 1936 Bsw arise for the first time along with multitudes of other markings. While IMO the condition of at least some of the eagles clearly speaks to their age, at least you answered one question I was going to ask other doubters: why is just the Nazi eagle fake when none of the eagles have been seen or identified? At least your opinion of the eagles is consistent, though I have to say even more far fetched than the other opinions.

As pointed out above we know gew88's were in polish use, if the one eagle is Polish (which it may not be). We also know that while the Germans destroyed a lot of Gew88's it ceratinly wasn't comprehensive. If what you’re suggesting was true non Turk 88’s would be much less common than they are. What about all the gew98's and other arms stashed away by any number of individuals and groups during the time? Also, Ccarbines were in police use, could rifles have been? I've never seen a photo so cant prove it of course, but none of the possibilities I suggest seem hard to imagine.

Still, to me the strongest evidence is the depot serial. You may disagree, but IMO there’s not even a debate on its originality. Jory’s post pretty much puts that one to bed. And if one can’t refute the 3R era depot serial, you’re really forced to consider some of the other markings as well.

In addition to why a gew88 would still be in German hands…. I fail to see how it’s any more antiquated than any number of things we know were in German hands…. Lebels, Berthiers, 8x50 mannlichers, Krags, Gras, Belgian 89’s etc. IMO the fact that it was old and odd proves nothing at all other it’s definitely more than plausible

 

[runner]

I don’t think the stock on this rifle or the barreled receiver shows any Polish connection.
My reasoning is as follows.

I have Polish manufactured mausers with dates ranging from 1924 to 1937. The eagles on them
are consistently more rounded in appearance than the one on this Gew 88 Stock. I doubt, but cannot
prove, that they used a significantly different emblem from 1919 to 1924.

I have two Gew 98s that were retained by the Poles for their own use, they show the same Eagle as used on their new
production mausers, so I would rule out this being some type of rework variant marking. To me the marking more closely resembles the Prussian style used by the Germans.

The Gews that the Poles retained for their own use (all I have seen) consistently show The addition of the Polish Eagle on the receiver, even when they did not bother to remove the German Eagle. If other Polish collectors have examples of German rifles known to have been retained by the Poles that did not get an additional receiver mark, that would be useful information. The Poles often stamped their Eagle on bolt bodies while retaining the German one as well.

I don’t think this stock spent the period 1919 - 1939 in either Germany or Poland. When the Germans upgraded their Gew 98s to “Gew 98m” pattern they maintained the detachable rear swivel system. The Poles did the same with their
WZ 98 and WZ 98a long rifles. I don’t know why either country would make this change to the then obsolete Gew88, and not the more modern Gew98 which remained in service for another two decades. Someone modified the rear swivel to the more conventional fixed loop type. This would suggest to me that this stock was sold to China or more likely in my opinion, a South American country as this modification was common in those locations.

 

[Bigdibbs88]

I don’t think the stock on this rifle or the barreled receiver shows any Polish connection.
My reasoning is as follows.

I have Polish manufactured mausers with dates ranging from 1924 to 1937. The eagles on them
are consistently more rounded in appearance than the one on this Gew 88 Stock. I doubt, but cannot
prove, that they used a significantly different emblem from 1919 to 1924.

I have two Gew 98s that were retained by the Poles for their own use, they show the same Eagle as used on their new
production mausers, so I would rule out this being some type of rework variant marking. To me the marking more closely resembles the Prussian style used by the Germans.

The Gews that the Poles retained for their own use (all I have seen) consistently show The addition of the Polish Eagle on the receiver, even when they did not bother to remove the German Eagle. If other Polish collectors have examples of German rifles known to have been retained by the Poles that did not get an additional receiver mark, that would be useful information. The Poles often stamped their Eagle on bolt bodies while retaining the German one as well.

I don’t think this stock spent the period 1919 - 1939 in either Germany or Poland. When the Germans upgraded their Gew 98s to “Gew 98m” pattern they maintained the detachable rear swivel system. The Poles did the same with their
WZ 98 and WZ 98a long rifles. I don’t know why either country would make this change to the then obsolete Gew88, and not the more modern Gew98 which remained in service for another two decades. Someone modified the rear swivel to the more conventional fixed loop type. This would suggest to me that this stock was sold to China or more likely in my opinion, a South American country as this modification was common in those locations.

runner- what are you talking about? You're ignoring a depot serial number with nearly identical examples shown on period Mg rework examples in favor of the fact that someone added a bent piece of wire for use with an (ancient) commercial sling. Nobody "modified" anything- the metal detach was part of the sling not part of the stock.

 

[runner]

runner- what are you talking about? You're ignoring a depot serial number with nearly identical examples shown on period Mg rework examples in favor of the fact that someone added a bent piece of wire for use with an (ancient) commercial sling. Nobody "modified" anything- the metal detach was part of the sling not part of the stock.

View attachment 351250

Not ignoring it at all, nor am I arguing that the rifle is not a legitimate depot rework. I think the most likely scenario is the rifle is a wartime rework, that was later “enhanced “. If you read my complete post it is clear I was referring to the interwar period. In fact my entire post is referring to the rifles post WWl history, and that I see no evidence of a Polish connection. If you have evidence to the contrary, please post it. I am open minded.
Are you saying the forced matched stock number was done after the war? I doubt the Germans were refurbishing Gew88s at the same time they were destroying tens of thousands of Gew98s.

 

[Bigdibbs88]

Not ignoring it at all, nor am I arguing that the rifle is not a legitimate depot rework. I think the most likely scenario is the rifle is a wartime rework, that was later “enhanced “. If you read my complete post it is clear I was referring to the interwar period.
Are you saying the forced matched stock number was done after the war? I doubt the Germans were refurbishing Gew88s at the same time they were destroying tens of thousands of Gew98s.

you were just asserting that rear rear sling swivel had been modified and that it was some kind of south american association. Nothing has been modified.

No, im saying the force matched stock was done in the 3R era- and have posted multiple examples of wartime magdeburg reworks with identical font. So far it seems nobody, except Bill, has been refuting that based on the examples posted. To me that serial is the linchpin

And as i replied to Paul, yes I'm absolutely asserting the Germans were reworking or in possession of rifles equally or more antiquated/ridiculous than this during the third reich. Lebels, Berthiers, 8x50 mannlichers, Krags, Gras, Belgian 89’s etc. There is no denying that and examples of all of these have been posted on this forum.

As for a possible polish connection, I have no evidence. Your guess is as good as mine

 

[Warrior1354]

The sling swivel set up on the stock is not German. I'm thinking the original style sling swivel that the rifle was designed for. Was changed out by the vet that brought it home here in the states. I've seen this done on a few imperial rifles. The big question to me is. We keep saying this is a mg depot rework. But, the german eagle depot proof is incorrect for that depot center. We know from many examples here they have a very distinctive characteristic proof they used.

 

[Bigdibbs88]

The sling swivel set up on the stock is not German. I'm thinking the original style sling swivel that the rifle was designed for. Was changed out by the vet that brought it home here in the states. I've seen this done on a few imperial rifles. The big question to me is. We keep saying this is a mg depot rework. But, the german eagle depot proof is incorrect for that depot center. We know from many examples here they have a very distinctive characteristic proof they used.

Jordan.... the swivel literally has fraktur proofs on it. It has a bent piece of wire put through it so that an old commercial sling could be used because they didnt have a period sling with the metal connection piece. That makes the rifle fake? Jeezus... I guess a byf44 with repro cleaning rod is fake.

I'm not saying its necessarily a Mg rework, the eagles are very different as you point out. The connection I'm making is the obvious similarity in the stock font. I believe anyone who knows even a little about 3R reworks can recognize that font as period original.

 

[runner]

I guess your definition of modification is different than mine. If you try and remove that sling loop, I think you will find it is more substantial than a simple piece of wire.

And yes that modification is very common on Gew88s that have been imported from SA. Can I prove it was done there, no nor did I claim that, I clearly stated it was my opinion, which I think is still allowed here.

Relative to the force matched SN, I have not mentioned it except in response to your statements, nor have I questioned its authenticity. To the contrary I have mentioned more than once that I think the base rifle is a legitimate WWl wartime rework.

 

[Warrior1354]

I'm not saying the rifle is fake. I'm just saying that sling swivel was modified. Chris recently posted a 1917 DWM up that had the same style set up. Someone added it.

Jordan.... the swivel literally has fraktur proofs on it. It has a bent piece of wire put through it so that an old commercial sling could be used because they didnt have a period sling with the metal connection piece. That makes the rifle fake? Jeezus... I guess a byf44 with repro cleaning rod is fake.

I'm not saying its necessarily a Mg rework, the eagles are very different as you point out. The connection I'm making is the obvious similarity in the stock font. I believe anyone who knows even a little about 3R reworks can recognize that font as period original.

 

[Bigdibbs88]

the sling swivel was not modified. someone hung a piece of wire in it. again i ask, does a repro cleaning rod make a byf44 fake? Had i simply removed the sling and piece of wire it would be a non issue. How does this have any bearing on the gun? These points are truly irrelevant to the guns authenticity or questions at hand.

Runner- your opinions are always welcome. I suppose I'm unclear on your stance of the stock serial. Either you believe its a period WW2 font or you dont. If you do, the swivel is pointless. If you dont, then i would point you again to the similar examples posted previously. If you still dont, we simply have a difference of opinion

 

[Warrior1354]

Now the sling swivel could have been modified to accept a different style sling from a different country. This is a French Lebel sling that would work totally fine with this set up. After all the Germans were hoarders, and recyclers. Before the war, and during the war. I remember Hambone posted up a rifle years ago that had a gas can strap modified to be used as a sling.

 

[Bigdibbs88]

After all the Germans were hoarders, and recyclers. Before the war, and during the war.

yes, you are making my point for me.

this thread has taken such a turn into irrelevent minutia carrying on any further is really feeling pointless. So i guess ill just leave it at- if anyone ever finds a similar interwar eagle please let me know!

 

[mauser1908]

I often encounter wire swivels. In my view, most of the time it was Uncle Bob trying to make a high speed deer rig out of a gun less accurate than an “out of the box” Remington 700. I’ve ripped off so many over the years I’ve lost count.

 

[Warrior1354]

I often encounter wire swivels. In my view, most of the time it was Uncle Bob trying to make a high speed deer rig out of a gun less accurate than an “out of the box” Remington 700. I’ve ripped off so many over the years I’ve lost count.

I have removed quite a few myself. I found one that they took a piece of wire and had it welded together. Plus they took the original sling swivel holder. Had it drilled it out, to accept the larger piece of metal. Why? Well I like what Bill said. He calls it the unibrow bubba method.

 

[runner]

the sling swivel was not modified. someone hung a piece of wire in it. again i ask, does a repro cleaning rod make a byf44 fake? Had i simply removed the sling and piece of wire it would be a non issue. How does this have any bearing on the gun? These points are truly irrelevant to the guns authenticity or questions at hand.

Runner- your opinions are always welcome. I suppose I'm unclear on your stance of the stock serial. Either you believe its a period WW2 font or you dont. If you do, the swivel is pointless. If you dont, then i would point you again to the similar examples posted previously. If you still dont, we simply have a difference of opinion

I have not mentioned the stock SN as the number fonts used by different Imperial era depots is not an area I have studied. Candidly I don’t feel qualified to give an opinion on its authenticity, I try to refrain from making definitive statements on areas I know little about.

I do not feel the rear swivel modification is irrelevant as it gives a clue to the rifles post WWl history. I currently own a dozen or so Gew 88s, most of which I photographed for Paul’s trending purposes And can be viewed in that sticky. They range from original matching, force matched, and bond rifles to recent (relatively speaking) Turkish and South American imports. The South American imports , I bought a half dozen from the same source, all had the rear swivels modified similar to yours. Does this prove yours was not modified by someone hear in the states, which I think is your position, no it is just one data point. The bond rifle and matching duffle cut examples I own or have owned did not have this modification, it is my opinion that is because these rifles came directly from Germany. If your rifle was in a country other than Germany, ( or perhaps Poland or Czechoslovakis, etc where it could have been requisitioned) prior to the time Germany started using the NS Eagle as a proof,acceptance, property mark etc. that would point to the NS stamp at least being a post war enhancement. I think most collectors agree that if a rifle has one known fake marking, that puts the entire rifle under a cloud.

It is always possible to develop theories that justify a unique rifle. And like any theory, it could be correct, but until and unless period documentation or similar examples surface it is understandably suspect.

 

[Loewe]

Paul- I can respect you POV, but respectfully disagree as all points you have made are plausibly refutable. I had mentioned in my initial post that this rifle has already been posted with mixed reviews, and yes I bought it from mike who I’m friends with who got it for $250 at a show setup. That’s the extent of the chain since surfacing for nothing. I certainly dont expect everyone to like it, just wanted to get some better pics out there.

I have to say it’s a bit disappointing that you think all of the eagles are bad simply because they haven’t been seen before, youve been around long enough to see swjXE’s and 1936 Bsw arise for the first time along with multitudes of other markings. While IMO the condition of at least some of the eagles clearly speaks to their age, at least you answered one question I was going to ask other doubters: why is just the Nazi eagle fake when none of the eagles have been seen or identified? At least your opinion of the eagles is consistent, though I have to say even more far fetched than the other opinions.

As pointed out above we know gew88's were in polish use, if the one eagle is Polish (which it may not be). We also know that while the Germans destroyed a lot of Gew88's it ceratinly wasn't comprehensive. If what you’re suggesting was true non Turk 88’s would be much less common than they are. What about all the gew98's and other arms stashed away by any number of individuals and groups during the time? Also, Ccarbines were in police use, could rifles have been? I've never seen a photo so cant prove it of course, but none of the possibilities I suggest seem hard to imagine.

Still, to me the strongest evidence is the depot serial. You may disagree, but IMO there’s not even a debate on its originality. Jory’s post pretty much puts that one to bed. And if one can’t refute the 3R era depot serial, you’re really forced to consider some of the other markings as well.

In addition to why a gew88 would still be in German hands…. I fail to see how it’s any more antiquated than any number of things we know were in German hands…. Lebels, Berthiers, 8x50 mannlichers, Krags, Gras, Belgian 89’s etc. IMO the fact that it was old and odd proves nothing at all other it’s definitely more than plausible

I think this exercise in civility on post 43 leaves a great deal to be desired, but I will assume that this was a best effort on your part.

Well we find common ground on respecting point of views (civility), but our views on this rifles originality or authenticity (in its entirety, especially the stock) diverge considerably. I am pretty sure the stock is bad, probably in its entirety because of the consistency of the problems. It is enough the stock is divergent from what is known (to me); but you know, it is 100% ok with me you think it is authentic... is does have the benefit of being unique.

** It is not that a G88 was found in service 1944-45 that is so suspicious (it is but besides the point) but an unmodified with the factory barrel (that is original Loewe f/p and acceptance, the factory barrel...) that really shows this is implausible.

 

[Loewe]

I have not mentioned the stock SN as the number fonts used by different Imperial era depots is not an area I have studied. Candidly I don’t feel qualified to give an opinion on its authenticity, I try to refrain from making definitive statements on areas I know little about.

I do not feel the rear swivel modification is irrelevant as it gives a clue to the rifles post WWl history. I currently own a dozen or so Gew 88s, most of which I photographed for Paul’s trending purposes And can be viewed in that sticky. They range from original matching, force matched, and bond rifles to recent (relatively speaking) Turkish and South American imports. The South American imports , I bought a half dozen from the same source, all had the rear swivels modified similar to yours. Does this prove yours was not modified by someone hear in the states, which I think is your position, no it is just one data point. The bond rifle and matching duffle cut examples I own or have owned did not have this modification, it is my opinion that is because these rifles came directly from Germany. If your rifle was in a country other than Germany, ( or perhaps Poland or Czechoslovakis, etc where it could have been requisitioned) prior to the time Germany started using the NS Eagle as a proof,acceptance, property mark etc. that would point to the NS stamp at least being a post war enhancement. I think most collectors agree that if a rifle has one known fake marking, that puts the entire rifle under a cloud.

It is always possible to develop theories that justify a unique rifle. And like any theory, it could be correct, but until and unless period documentation or similar examples surface it is understandably suspect.

Frank, this rifle aside I would like to gather your G88 trends, add them to the on-going study (if you provided a G88 that didn't make the trends thread PM me, - I have been unable to keep up with PM's as I was greatly distracted the last 4-6 month); what I have had forum time for has been mostly working on some old (backlog) of additions to Amberg, G88 and 71 updates but there are far to many that accrued to make up for 4 months of absence.

Anyway, this (the research threads) is my main preoccupation with the forum, idiotic threads like this one will fall into oblivion (at best obscurity) but if we can develop the trends in a public venue then maybe it will further (what passes for) serious research of Imperial variation.

 

[Bigdibbs88]

I think this exercise in civility on post 43 leaves a great deal to be desired, but I will assume that this was a best effort on your part.

Well we find common ground on respecting point of views (civility), but our views on this rifles originality or authenticity (in its entirety, especially the stock) diverge considerably. I am pretty sure the stock is bad, probably in its entirety because of the consistency of the problems. It is enough the stock is divergent from what is known (to me); but you know, it is 100% ok with me you think it is authentic... is does have the benefit of being unique.

** It is not that a G88 was found in service 1944-45 that is so suspicious (it is but besides the point) but an unmodified with the factory barrel (that is original Loewe f/p and acceptance, the factory barrel...) that really shows this is implausible.

Paul- when i said i respected your opinion I meant it. And though i do think its far fetched to say every marking on the stock is fake, I meant it when i said at least your opinion was consistent. Your thought process, while i disagree with it in this instance, at least makes sense to me.

The gun is especially troublesome when you look at it from a trending perspective. The problem is depot reworks- at least in the 3R era- follow loose trends at best. There are examples that defy logic that pop up regularly and inconsistency in serial fonts, markings, part numbering etc even within the same depots in the same era. I am judging the markings based my own experience and when possible on comparable examples (like the serial numbers that have been shown- and that still pretty much remain unchallenged which is telling). If I looked at it from a trends perspective I would be on board with you.

I know not everyone will like the rifle, though the majority of people did, and my intent is not to force anyone to accept it. Skepticism is warranted. I'm definitely challenging the "I've never seen it so it's fake and I'm right" perspective and also challenging arguments where i see explanations. On your barrel example for instance, i would just point out that the nazi's were literally producing new 8x50R for 50 year old straight pull foreign Mannlichers- thats insane. While I agree the barrel on this is an oddity I dont find it any more insane than that.

As you pointed out, the thread has reached a point of absurdity in discussing pieces of wire and debating circumstances on why the rifle might or might not have existed. I had hoped for a debate about the markings themselves with examples and counter examples posted which we had at one time. Its probably time that i let the thread die (at least until more pertinent information pops up).