Printable View
Anyone now much about the Mauser Oberndorf 1933 Banner-K. Marked to the DRP, Deutsches Reich Post.
Were they uesed by Hittlers ''sa and Stormtroopers''?
Aslo saying that it's commercial finnished not military finnished...whats the differance?
Can anyone know much about this topic?
execellent condition seller is asking $2500.00 for it.
Cheers,
Volks.
Although not a Deutsches Reich Post marked one, check the MKL for an article on Banner mausers accompanied by a 168 pic photo montage on ...
1934 "Banner" Mauser (Mfg by Mauser Werke AG, Oberndorf a/N)
Hope that helps .. :)
Regards,
Doug
These were only issued to German postal police units.
These are very hard to find with mathching bolts
NorthWalesFred
Yes the bolt is mis matching... do you know the going price for one? he is asking $2500.00 it's in excellent condition.
In my opinion only, way too expensive for a miss-matched bolt piece .... :thdown:Quote:
Originally Posted by volksgranadier
For me, the moment the bolt became a miss-match in the description, I was done .... :lol:
I wouldn't pay more than $1,000, but again, collecting is all about personal decisions and others may think that's way too low and unrealistic ... ;)
I would pay $2,500+ if it was "all correct" and "all matching" ... :thup:
Regards,
Doug
Yeah I agree I said,Quote:
Originally Posted by Badger
Hi Lewis,
Its a very nice rifle, except that the bolt is miss matching and the rifle also has no original sling. due to its history, ‘’ these Rifles were actually delivered to the ReichsPost and were branded on the butt
with a cartouche proclaiming the rifle to be a “Gewehr für Deutche ReichsPost” (GfDRP). The first of these rifles became available in 1934.
In reality, some of the rifles went to German Wehrmacht troops for trials and others found their way into the hands of groups like the SA.
it has a good story but what makes it worth its cost and is a absolutely rarity and in this case is if the bolt matches the rifle.
How is the Bore?
I truly think this rifle is worth around $1700.00
I have a 1935 Brazilan mauser unfired matching/ bayonet matching and it original sight in target to the serial number or the rifle, that was worth around the $2200 mark.
What do you think Lewis? I hope i don't come across the wrong way.
I should of checked here first cause a said $1700.00, but knowing this now i wont pay that..dam.
I agree with Badger. A mismatched bolt takes away from the value of the gun. Looking at your picture of the Mauser I would almost say that the stock has been lightly sanded. If you have more pictures please show them.
NorthwalesFred
Attachment 33152Attachment 33151Attachment 33150Attachment 33149Attachment 33153
Really, how can you tell?
1) Take a look at the photo that shows the left side with the finger groove. (3rd photo)Quote:
Originally Posted by volksgranadier
A roughly wedge-shaped piece of wood has split off behind the head of the crossbolt /recoil bolt. This would cause a sharp edge at the end of the break. But the edge has been softened, indicating that the wood has been subsequently smoothed. And the split was almost certainly a result of the recoil bolt being driven out from the right side of the stock, after removing the nut.
2) The recoil bolt head seems to show traces of rust or a surface finish (varnish?) that is not visible elsewhere on the rifle.
3) Also look at the first photo. Dings usually have sharp edges, being caused by hard surfaces driven into the wood. But the dings to the left of the number on the floorplate have soft edges, also indicating refinishing.
4) Take a look at the last photo. The front edge of the nosecap and the outer edge of the sling loop on the barrel band are almost the first surfaces to have the bluing rubbed off, even if all you do is slide the rifle into a carrying bag. On this example these surface are, IMHO, too good to be true for a rifle that otherwise shows some dings.
5) The numbers show wear, but the bluing around the edges of the numbers does not. Conclusion: the bluing was applied or touched up after the wear had occurred.
General principle: inconsistency of wear patterns is a strong clue for a rifle having been refinished or parts replaced.
My deduction: the rifle was totally dismantled and at least partially refinished. But please bear in mind that all these observations are AFAICTWAHTOIMH*
:wave:
Patrick
*As Far As I Can Tell Without Actually Having The Object In My Hands
PS: It is not a good idea to remove the crossbolt/recoil bolt from an old Mauser. They have been seated very firmly by the recoil to which the rifle has been subjected during its working life, and there is often a rust/wood bond on the square shank.
Once removed, cleaned and reseated, and ESPECIALLY if you are one of those optimists who thinks that a complete soaking for cleaning purposes is the right way to treat precision-cut wood that has had a century or so to reach a stable state, the bolt can never be as tight as before. So its function is impaired, setting the stage for a crack in the wrist when future recoil pushes the system right back into the tang cutout.
Certainly has been rubbed on enough to soften the edges as noted above, steel wool at least. The photo showing the chunk out behind the recoil bolt also seems to show a disparity in the finish between the removable sight partes and the barrel and sight base.
Still, not a bad looking rifle, but I don't know how sellable it would be even at US$1000. Somebody probably would get excited in an auction situation, but retail? Not so much. Too much opportunity to scutinize.
Thanks for all the info guy's i ended up saying no...the seller droped the price down to $1850.00 still not worth it, I said sorry due to the above reasons.
many thanks.
Volks.
It's good that you are taking your time, not impulsive and being patient ... :thup:Quote:
Originally Posted by volksgranadier
Keep looking and spend a lot of time researching. Build up a network of personal relationships amongst collectors, making sure they're aware of what you're looking for, as they often become the best source of pointing you too auctions and sales.
Regards,
Doug