Collectors of the K98

[wjborgmann]

This is an invitation to collectors of the K98. Lets start a thread for those of us who collect what is probably the best rifle ever to be put into general service. As a collector of these weapons I have yet to find another weapon to match its long range capabilities. What are your opinions?

[gorbag]

A good all around rifle, but the stock beddings usually leave something to be desired (especially after years of use). The trigger actions are usually crisp, though, unlike a No. 4 Enfield I have that has an extra creepy action.

[Tom Houlihan]

Okay, I'm game to start a new thread!!! I must beg to differ on your description of the K98. While I do consider it a fine weapon, I cannot agree that it is the best weapon ever put into general service!!! While I was not issued one, I still have to put my vote for the M1 Garand. I've fired one, and they are sweet. Well made, accurate, and the semiauto factor puts it ahead of the otherwise well designed K98. Just imagine if things were reversed: All those landsers carrying M1s, and the GIs carrying K98s. Think things would have gone the same way?

[The Chief]

My Czeck 8mm K-98 is indeed a nice weapon, but the front sights leave something to be desired. I prefer my Hungarian 7.62x54 M-44. Although if I ever go into combat I hope to be armed with an M-4 carbine or an old M-14...These M-16's just don't cut it!

[gorbag]

You're not a big fan of overblown squirrel guns?

[The Chief]

well the M-4 (carbine version of the M-16) is great, it can accept all the usual attachments and it doesn't have the M-16s annoying jamming and dirt problems.
On another note, I wonder how the accuracy of the Sturmgevier compared to the AK-47?

[Tom Houlihan]

Well, I have to admit that I've never gotten the chance to fire a Kar98. The only WWII weapon I've fired is an M-1, and I LIKED IT!! I've carried an M16A2, and I guess it's better than the A1's. It has certain advantages over something like an AK, though, like range. The round may not be the best in the world, but remember: the best gun in a gunfight is the one in your hand!

[Dun]

Nice rifle, the model98 design. In its various configurations, it was as ubiquitous in its day as the AK and its variants are today. Having owned several of the Mausers, I can say they handle well and are certainly strong, powerful and accurate enuff, and ultra reliable- not to mention aesthetically pleasing. Many have been (sadly) chopped into deer rifles, at which they excel.
Personally tho, I find them bulky and slow as a combat weapon, and prefer the British Enfield... holds more ammo, easier handling and quicker to shoot. And as accurate or more so in the #4 version with the peep style rear sight.
But thats one mans opinion!

[wjborgmann]

My original post especially mentioned the long range capabilities of the K98. My collection includes British Enfields; M1;K98;Springfields. My original post did not rate these for their individual firepower but for their accuracy beyond 400 meters. In this respect I found that the top weapons were the K98 and Springfield.

[Mitch Williamson]

W. J. Borgmann just to clarify. You would rate the Kar 98 above the Springfield? By how much? I mean are they close in accuracy etc...

I would really like to know as I have no chance in Australia of handling them.

Anyone else can comment too...

Regards
Mitch

[wjborgmann]

I have 4 shootable K98 and only 1 Springfield. At ranges of over 400 Meters the Mausers are more accurate. At closer ranges ( 100m) the K98 shoot a tighter pattern. We must remember that the Springfield was copied from the Mauser design.

[gorbag]

The Springfield production lines also weren't up to the same standards, with different arsenals and production lines putting out widely varied rifles in terms of fitting, accuracy, etc. A good K98 and a good Springfield shoot exactly the same long range, they're identical actions.