Mauser 98K Double Turret Sniper Rifle listed on EE

B

bryan.14

CGN Regular
Rating - 99.2%
130   1   1
Location
Vancouver Island
Is the Double Turret Mauser 98k listed on the EE and original Sniper Rifle?

Looks to be in Very nice condition compared to many bring back rifles I’ve seen.

Any thoughts on this one?
 
It is a 1930's hunting rifle scope. when and by whom it came to be in a turret mount is questionable. The bluing on the scope is far more faded than the turret rings. the rings appear scratched up but not the scope, the base of the rings appears perfect.
 
Last edited:
mozambique technique said:
It's not this one is it? Discussed a few months back.

https://www.canadiangunnutz.com/for...2309-K98-Sniper-listed-on-EE?highlight=sniper
Click to expand...

The rifle discussed back in June was an SS double claw clone. The rifle that’s presently listed for sale on the EE for $13K is a high turret clone. Based on the similarities between the pictures, it would seem as though the same person was / is in possession of both.

If anyone is interested, I can unpack this turret rifle (like I did in June for the double claw) bud the main takeaway is that it does not appear to be authentic. I posted two authentic turret rifles in the other thread if anyone wants to compare.

Cheers,
SoH
 
Coyote Ugly said:
Mitchell’s Mausers are Garbage. Don’t waste your money on a Hump Job.
Click to expand...

there were two rifles on the EE .. one was the sniper that has since been removed (didnt look like sold, just removed) and another a mitchells mauser.

There is a lot of hate on mitchells mausers but I would argue that they are as good or bad as RCs ... both are more or less heavily treated and mismatched. Do you prefer a sanded and bleached stock or cosmoline soaked?

if someone is looking for a good looking k98 and is made aware what he is getting then a mitchell might not be a bad choice as long as price is ok. I see a problem if "good" guns were butchered up to generate mitchells
 
Teac said:
there were two rifles on the EE .. one was the sniper that has since been removed (didnt look like sold, just removed) and another a mitchells mauser.

There is a lot of hate on mitchells mausers but I would argue that they are as good or bad as RCs ... both are more or less heavily treated and mismatched. Do you prefer a sanded and bleached stock or cosmoline soaked?

if someone is looking for a good looking k98 and is made aware what he is getting then a mitchell might not be a bad choice as long as price is ok. I see a problem if "good" guns were butchered up to generate mitchells
Click to expand...

It really comes down to a matter of opinion. Any collector who focuses on untouched examples, isn’t going to care for either, but I suppose it really just depends on your priorities (history vs aesthetics). If you want a rifle that’s still got a bit of history, a RC isn’t a horrible option, but like you pointed out, they’re usually pretty ugly. If you’re the kinda guy who likes blonde stocks and new bluing then I guess a Michell’s Mauser might be more in line with your interests. Personally I’d argue that a Mitchell’s Mauser is uglier than a RC because they look far more like sporters than they do military rifles... but that’s just me.

FWIW, I don’t think that good original example were ruined by Michell’s Mauser. I’ve heard that they just refurbish the RCs... which makes sense because they wouldn’t have access to large quantities of original rifles and the cost of the original rifles would really cut into their margins.
 
Last edited:
student of history said:
It really comes down to a matter of opinion. Any collector who focuses on untouched examples, isn’t going to care for either, but I suppose it really just depends on your priorities (history vs aesthetics). If you want a rifle that’s still got a bit of history, a RC isn’t a horrible option, but like you pointed out, they’re usually pretty ugly. If you’re the kinda guy who likes blonde stocks and new bluing then I guess a Michell’s Mauser might be more in line with your interests. FWIW, I don’t think that good originals were ruined by Michell’s Mauser. I’ve heard that they just refurbish the RCs... which makes sense because they wouldn’t have access to large quantities of original rifles and the cost of the original rifles would really cut into their margins.
Click to expand...

I agree. a serious collector might not want a RC nor a mitchells... but some guy who just wants a nice looking k98 would probably be better off with a mitchells than an RC... assuming they dont want to spend 2000-5000 USD for a minty matched K98

I am glad that no good rifles were mitchelled though !

in the end everybody would have to get what is right for them ... I just wanted to point out that mitchells arent the work of the devil as one could think if reading the comments on them .. Personally I find mitchells look somehow "off"
 
Coyote Ugly said:
Mitchell’s Mausers are Garbage. Don’t waste your money on a Hump Job.
Click to expand...

They're "humped" and expensive for what you're getting.

On the other hand, they look very nice, usually have excellent bores and shoot very well.

They are not collectible status IMHO.

Still, if you want a pretty, representative shooter, they're just fine.

Mitchell's took on all sorts of refurbishment projects. I've heard all sorts of stories about where they got the arms from, which mostly say they came out of East European storage, mostly as parts or partial rifles, that didn't make it to refurbishment. It would not be presumptuous to make such an assessment.

As for all non matching??? Not so. I bought up an estate sale about a decade back and the fellow had nothing but Mitchell's products in his den, which was really a very large walk in safe.

There were four laminated stock late war K98s with different manufacturing codes but receivers dated from 1941-1945(swp). All were matching numbers and all were polished to a high luster. They also had all issue accessories and matching bayos.

There were also four Walnut stocked K98s with dates from 1936-1940. All were mismatched numbers and all were polished to a high luster.

He had C96, P08, P38 pistols and a couple of dewat smgs, an MP38 and an MP40, along with about a dozen helmets and a few medals/flags, with dozens of books.

It made for a very nice collection. None of the helmets, flags, medals were authentic but they were in pristine condition and for most people looking at them, were as real as they wanted them to be.

His wife had all the bills and import papers for everything. She was under the impression the stuff was worth way more than he had paid for it. Took her a couple of months to get over the shock of his death as well as what the real value of the collection was.
 
I'm only impressed with the walk in safe in your post, the Mitchells Mausers aren't even worthy of being kept in a walk in safe!

bearhunter said:
They're "humped" and expensive for what you're getting.

On the other hand, they look very nice, usually have excellent bores and shoot very well.

They are not collectible status IMHO.

Still, if you want a pretty, representative shooter, they're just fine.

Mitchell's took on all sorts of refurbishment projects. I've heard all sorts of stories about where they got the arms from, which mostly say they came out of East European storage, mostly as parts or partial rifles, that didn't make it to refurbishment. It would not be presumptuous to make such an assessment.

As for all non matching??? Not so. I bought up an estate sale about a decade back and the fellow had nothing but Mitchell's products in his den, which was really a very large walk in safe.

There were four laminated stock late war K98s with different manufacturing codes but receivers dated from 1941-1945(swp). All were matching numbers and all were polished to a high luster. They also had all issue accessories and matching bayos.

There were also four Walnut stocked K98s with dates from 1936-1940. All were mismatched numbers and all were polished to a high luster.

He had C96, P08, P38 pistols and a couple of dewat smgs, an MP38 and an MP40, along with about a dozen helmets and a few medals/flags, with dozens of books.

It made for a very nice collection. None of the helmets, flags, medals were authentic but they were in pristine condition and for most people looking at them, were as real as they wanted them to be.

His wife had all the bills and import papers for everything. She was under the impression the stuff was worth way more than he had paid for it. Took her a couple of months to get over the shock of his death as well as what the real value of the collection was.
Click to expand...
 
Coyote Ugly said:
I'm only impressed with the walk in safe in your post, the Mitchells Mausers aren't even worthy of being kept in a walk in safe!
Click to expand...

When I sold those firearms, they weren't misrepresented in any manner. Their deceased owner never shot them. Just kept the original, wood packing crates piled against one wall and displayed the firearms and militaria on the other three walls.

As for the walk in safe, it probably cost as much as a small house to have built. He kept other valuables in there as well, which came as a surprise to his wife.

Seems he liked to collect small gold bars and historical gold coins as well.

Lucky for her.
 
I'm torn on the topic. Couple too many ex wives and the 'Patch sucking means my authentic WW2 german rifle days are behind me I'm thinking. A Mitchell's mauser does seem a bit tacky, but so do others.
Tastefully rewound ( not restored...just partially) mausers are what I strive for. I've a couple sportered post WW1 rifles that live in my safe...new wood and sights restored ( first thing that 'grows legs' is usually the sights)...they are great fun.
I'm leery about people restoring to 'too perfect' of condition though... it's like a shill is just waiting for them.
Mitchell's are almost like a replica that you can shoot...they look like a replica to me. In the way that they are just a little too heavily made up... "She ain't pretty, she just looks that way"
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom