i have a mauser marked bcd 4 and it is only 39" long i have looked all over the internet and cant find a pic of one that looks like it. all serial #s match ahs all of the waffenmet markings and appears to be unmolested with the exception fo the stock being varnished. can any one help. i will have to set up photo bucket or something to post pics,
model 98 mauser
- Thread starter 4wheeler
- Start date
tahunua001
New member
two ideas come to mind. one is a sporterized model, many bring backs and such were cut just ahead of the rear stock band and some guys even cut down the barrels to make them better for brush hunting. another one may be the spanish FR7 or FR8 mausers converted to 7.62 nato, they cut them down to look somewhat like the jungle carbine enfields with a short barrel. does the front of the stock terminate with a flat plate a few inches back from the muzzle?
this pic belongs to another member here, does yours look like the one at the bottom?
this pic belongs to another member here, does yours look like the one at the bottom?
tahunua001
New member
those are really grainy... not much help...
I'm pretty sure that's no factory hack job. I believe you just have a bubba'd sporter job.
I'm pretty sure that's no factory hack job. I believe you just have a bubba'd sporter job.
The "Gustloff" story is interesting. Wilhelm Gustloff was a German Nazi who was assassinated by Communists in Switzerland in 1936. The Nazis made him a martyr to the cause and a hero, even though a few years later Hitler ordered the killing of SA members of a similar bent.
Factories (like the Jewish-owned Simson plant) that were not run by "loyal" Nazis were taken over by the government, then turned over to the Nazi party and run for the profit of the party and its backers. Many of those enterprises were named after Gustloff and combined under the name "Gustloff Werke" (Gustloff Works). Of course, the government made sure the "Gustloff Werke" got very profitable government contracts; it was not hard to make money, since labor was mostly from the concentration camps.
Jim
Factories (like the Jewish-owned Simson plant) that were not run by "loyal" Nazis were taken over by the government, then turned over to the Nazi party and run for the profit of the party and its backers. Many of those enterprises were named after Gustloff and combined under the name "Gustloff Werke" (Gustloff Works). Of course, the government made sure the "Gustloff Werke" got very profitable government contracts; it was not hard to make money, since labor was mostly from the concentration camps.
Jim
mapsjanhere
New member
Looks to me like a duffel cut rifle that got its barrel shortened. If a GI was trying to bring home an unregistered souvenir, the stock didn't fit into the duffel bag. So they were typically cut off at the first band. There's a lot of restored duffel cut guns, but some went the other way and trimmed the barrel.
Someone put that front sight on, and a GI would probably not have had access to the equipment to do that. So maybe a combination of a "duffel cut" and some other work later on.
FWIW, the only "registration" would have been the permission paper, and whether the GI had that or not was often irrelevant. Army regulations required that all the GI's belongings had to fit in his duffel bag; unit commanders could choose whether or not to enforce that, and many didn't. But some did, so if a GI was in such a unit, his souvenir had to fit in the bag, whether he had a paper or not. As to the paper, again sometimes MP's at the point of debarkation would ask for it, sometimes there was no check at all.
The father of a friend brought back a P.35(p) Radom through NY; the MPs took the gun, and a welder in NYPD uniform welded up the muzzle and the gun was given back. Obviously, that was not a universal practice, but it was done to comply with NYC law, which even then was completely insane on handguns.
Jim
FWIW, the only "registration" would have been the permission paper, and whether the GI had that or not was often irrelevant. Army regulations required that all the GI's belongings had to fit in his duffel bag; unit commanders could choose whether or not to enforce that, and many didn't. But some did, so if a GI was in such a unit, his souvenir had to fit in the bag, whether he had a paper or not. As to the paper, again sometimes MP's at the point of debarkation would ask for it, sometimes there was no check at all.
The father of a friend brought back a P.35(p) Radom through NY; the MPs took the gun, and a welder in NYPD uniform welded up the muzzle and the gun was given back. Obviously, that was not a universal practice, but it was done to comply with NYC law, which even then was completely insane on handguns.
Jim
hammered54
New member
I've read many of these story's about paper work for bringing back rifles from overseas.
my Dad ...R.I.P. sent many back home thru the mail ..so he told us 11 in all, plus other things Bayonets...belts..helmets..even a P08.
just wrapped them up in brown paper and string and shipped them home to the family address....all arrived in good shape.
still have most of it.
Matt.
my Dad ...R.I.P. sent many back home thru the mail ..so he told us 11 in all, plus other things Bayonets...belts..helmets..even a P08.
just wrapped them up in brown paper and string and shipped them home to the family address....all arrived in good shape.
still have most of it.
Matt.
It was illegal to mail guns home, but many GIs did so and got away with it. It was also illegal to bring back guns without the "capture papers" but again many had none and were never asked for them. That applied only to captured enemy weapons, though. Bringing back U.S. weapons was considered stealing government property and punishable by imprisonment. In spite of all the stories about how Grandpa or Uncle Jim brought back a dozen M1 rifles or a case of .45 pistols, it just wasn't done. Not because of ethical considerations, but because violating the rules would delay discharge and those guys wanted out ASAP!
Jim
Jim