doublegunshop.com - home Forums General Discussion German & Austrian Sporting Guns @ doublegunshop.com **UPDATE** An 11.2x72 Schuler joins the family

Another 11.2x72 Schuler cal rifle joins the family. This is my 3rd rifle in this caliber.

This was posted for sale about a year ago in a classified forum. I can't believe it didn't sell... lucky me !

The posting included the following information.

"...I picked this up last week to help a friend out ... and I really have no use for it. I thought I would post it on here to see if anyone had any interest.The makers name is on the pic of the rib.It has a 24" octagon to round full ribbed barrel and the LOP is 14 3/8" to front of the double set trigger and weighs under 8.5 lb.Most questions can be answered by the pics. Brass dies and a bullet sizer .450 to .440 is included. ..."

information from others added this ...

"... Perhaps "FR. TENHAEFF UTRECHT" (found on the rib) is actually a small retail sporting good shop that had their name added and sold this rifle. ..."

As in the past, if anyone can help to interpret the makings and the maker and year of production, it would be greatly appreciated.

http://www.buckstix.com/buckpics/11.2x72-000.jpg


http://www.buckstix.com/buckpics/11.2x72-0000.jpg

There looks to be a set of marks on the left side of the tube just forward of the receiver, which may be the bullet weight. But odd that a mm stamped Suhl made rifle doesn't have the bullet weight. Interesting >>U<< on the top of the frame. Too, interesting double witness marks. Also interesting is the rear sight?

Hochachtungsvoll,

Raimey
rse

I have no idea on the H; maybe Hengelhaupt Klan, like Herman, Peter, Richard, Willi, etc. who were specialist for all types of tubes. But they were outo of Zella Sankt Blasii - Mehlis.


Hochachtungsvoll,

Raimey
rse

The stamps on the left side of the barrel forward of the receiver is "560" - that number doesn't match up with any other numbers. Perhaps a serial number or item number from the retailer. As to the rear sight, its absolutely original from when the rifle was built. I have several other pre-war German Mausers that have have original Lyman rear sites. I also have several pre-war German catalogs that show Lyman rear sight and Lyman Scope options. Also, the stock wood cut for the rear sight clearance has "age-period-patina" just like the rest of the stock's woodwork. It is also interesting that the rear sight filler block on the barrel is original and not later added. And finally, there is a small radius cut in the Lyman sight's base block to allow clearance for use of a stripper clip. You can see this in the 4th and 10th pictures.

The "U" on top of the receiver is not a Definitive Proof mark as stated in the note shown in the photos. The rifle was made with a leaf rear sight on the barrel which was removed and the dovetail filled. I suspect the matted top of the receiver is to cover up a filler for another dovetail cut for a claw mount front base. In this case the "U" may be the marke of the maker (UTRECHT?), retailer, engraver, or something else altogether. A bring back rifle with a dovetailed base for a missing scope is pretty common and filling the dovetail is also a pretty common way to address the problem. I have filled a couple, myself. The addition of a peep sight would also be a common period, American, solution. This is all only supposition to explain the unusual "U" on the receiver.
Mike

There is absolutely no evidence of a front receiver cut for a claw mount. And no evidence of any alteration of a corresponding rear claw mount base. The rear sight filler block is also period German and not a later U.S. addition. Here are two examples of German rifles in my collection that also had original Lyman rear sights - added by the factory at the time of manufacture.

https://www.doublegunshop.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=645776&page=1
https://www.doublegunshop.com/forum...r=643075&Searchpage=1&Main=28089

It must have been made circa 1909-1910 as it has transitional type stamps. There is the diameter in mm along with a service powder charge of 4,7 grammes of Military Flake.

Serbus,

Raimey
rse

I have stared @ this German text for some time & I just do not think a German Mechanic would scribe >>PRIMA FUSS STAHL<< on a tube?

Prime Foot Steel must pair nicely with the claw mount bases that accept feet(füsse)? So maybe „Prima Füsse Stahl“???? No, I am just joking....

Raimey
rse

Too, the >>L<< on STAHL just doesn't look proper and not anal nor pedantic enough to be typical German effort? Too, the >>S<< seems to be a bit out of place?

Hochachtungsvoll,

Raimey
rse

Is a jeweled(adorned) bolt typical for the period?


Hochachtungsvoll,

Serbus,

Raimey
rse

Ford, is it here where the slot for the Claw(Suhler) mount bases to accept Füsse was filed down and then was covered with stippling?

Hochachtungsvoll,

Serbus,

Raimey
rse

Since the firearms merchant was in the Netherlands, that might explain the misspellings on the tube steel type.

Hochachtungsvoll,

Raimey
rse

buckstix,
Regarding the possibility of a dovetail cut in the receiver, the rifle is yours and, in your hands, making you the authority on it. As I said, my idea was only a supposition.
Mike

Raimey,
buckstix disputes the idea that there was ever a dovetail, and he has the rifle "in hand". However, if there had ever been a dovetail, that is where it would have been. A tight-fitting filler would have been put in and filed/polished to match and then stippled to conceal the faint line at the joint.
Mike

I always really appreciate your comments, but in this case you are incorrect in your assessment of a possible filled slot for a claw mount base. As mentioned earlier, there is also no evidence of any modification for a corresponding rear claw mount base.

But, to put an end to this discussion, I took the rifle to a local casting inspection shop this morning. I often used this business when I was a Design Engineer. They X-ray castings to look for flaws. I also used their service in the past to X-ray Colt Single Action revolvers looking for welding repairs and serial number alterations. As the X-ray below shows, there are NO SIGNS of any alterations to the front receiver of this rifle's action, only uniform grain structure throughout.

Well, as a side note: Here is a warning about using someone else's hand-loads. As the original pictures show, this rifle came with some hand-loaded ammo. The seller assured me that the original owner of the rifle, that loaded the ammo, was a careful trustworthy reloader. The load data that was written on the box read ... "400g Woodleigh sp, 85g 3031, CCI 250 magnum primers". I have been loading for this cartridge for about 8 years, and have never seen such a HOT load with 3031 powder. The 1992 Handloader Magazine #144, lists a 400g bullet and 3031 powder with a 76.0g starting load, and 80.0g max load. When I pulled the bullets of the hand-loaded ammo, I found powder weighing from 87g up to 90g. NEVER, NEVER, trust anyone's hand-loaded ammo without carefully inspecting it. The only hand-loads I trust, are my own.

Hello All,

I finally had some nice weather to test some loads. I tested some light loads with 300g bullets, and some full loads with 400g bullets. All were shot with the peep site's small aperture. The light loads that came with the rifle shot higher and had velocity spread "all over the place" - ranging from a low of 1404 fps to a high of 1631 fps. Since I didn't load these, I suspect this was due to poor loading technique and not just poor performance of the lighter bullet. I also loaded the same full house loads from when I tested the IMMAN 11.2x72 Schuler a while back.

I noticed a "significant" difference in felt recoil with this lighter Mannlicher. It weighed 8.5 pounds and had 68 ft/lbs recoil, whereas the Imman weighed 11 pounds and only had 53 ft/lbs recoil. That 15 ft/lbs difference in recoil energy was noticeable, and much less pleasant to shoot.

It is important to note that the load with the 400g bullet (bullets deep seated to an overall loaded length of 3.300") easily achieved 2,350 fps and would make an excellent load for Africa, having the same performance as the 404 Jeffery but with a greater sectional density. It is also more potent than a 375 H&H. Energy at 100 yards for the 11.2x72 Schuler is 4,170 ft/lbs, compared to only 3,125 ft/lbs for the 375 H&H.

as always comments are most welcome

.

http://www.buckstix.com/buckpics/11.2x72-TARG-SM.jpg



.

http://www.buckstix.com/buckpics/11.2x72-TARG2-SM.jpg

With the Rear Ocular in play, what did your sight picture of the front sight resemble? LIke all the front sight or fine bead, etc.?

Hochachtungsvoll,

Raimey
rse

Even with the small aperture insert flipped up, you could still see the entire front site blade with the bead on top. I used a 6 o-clock hold on both targets.

As one can quickly glean by looking at my inscription data, I have stayed merely lurking here on the board for some time, such as to learn a lot, to get to know the style and the various members (including their respective quirks, as they may be), and to wait for an opportunity where I might myself be able to contribute something of at least moderate value and usefulness. But you be the judges. 😉
I am posting from Germany, am holding the appropriate various licences (including a commercial German FFL), but my livelihood and main daytime occupation is firearms law (plus hunting laws), and has been so for decades; we are one of the small (lower single-digit) number of law firms specialized therein, and hence we are active nationwide.

After reading the report of Buckstix (he was circumspect enough to post it parallely in several fora, such as to optimize the possible feedback yields from their various, and not always overlapping readerships), I did become tempted to contribute finally something small on my own, and to research the engraved name of Tenhaeff.
The mix of location and calibre hinted to a slightly romantic notion of colonialism, big game hunt, and adventures in „Insulinde“ (the Dutch East Indies). Reality was different, but that‘s another story (Multatuli…).

One may be allowed to muse whether the gun was really exported from Germany to Utrecht, as intended and engraved, or whether the deal fell through due to the inflation, and the gun then stayed in Suhl (such as one French-German contributor „Grandveneur“ had supposed in other fora, w.r.t. to his 1923-made rifle in 11,2x72 Schüler, which seems NOT to have ended up in Calcutta at Lyon & Lyon, whereto it was destined and thus engraved).
Tenhaeff, like many other Dutch dealers, had his name inscribed / engraved on the guns that he procured (mostly from Liège and Suhl), and also printed on (shotgun) ammunition, both centrefire and pinfire. At that time, dealers could and would have printed the top cardboard disk of their shotgun shells with their name and the shot size, and here also the brass case bottom (pinfire).

As the picture of the proof stamps shows, the recommended standard use load at the specific time of production of this gun was 4,7 grams of G.B.P. (military Gewehrblättchenpulver), which may have changed some years later.
Axel Eichendorf has variously hinted that the stamped, horizontal separated „use loads“ in the old proof office stamps (*not* to be confused with an actual over-pressure proof charge) have changed with the time. The bullet type and weight was indicated at times, and at times not, which gives a further clue to determine more closely the time of the specific proof of the gun. My guess and feeling is that the original proof might even have been shortly before the Great War (i.e. before 1914), but the minuscule changes of the proof stamping rules are NOT properly redbnered and reflected in printed media, notably not in the lacunous and unreliable pamphlet of Gerhard Wirnsberger, which after 55 years now has long outlived its limited, and once valuable usefulness. I recall that German proof stamps at times indicated bullet weight *and* charge weight, and at other times only the (recommended use) charge weight and the bullet type, but I am not sure which changed when, and inhowfar Suhl and Zella-Mehlis proof offices might have differed in this specific respect.

As much as I recall, civilian factory loads with 5,25 grams Rottweiler Blättchenpulver R 5 (behind a 26,0 grams FMJ) und 5,0 grams Troisdorfer (Nr. 6 clearly was mentioned in a contemporary Schüler advertisement, but I am not sure about its characteristics? it was possibly loaded by Stahl or Gecado) existed, but this should be more carefully researched together with ammunition collectors.
Some research on the August Schüler firm (ASS) and on his son Richard Schüler has been conducted in the last decades, starting more or less with the German gunsmith Harald Wolf in the Hatari Times (e.g. issue # 11); he also chambered some new rifles for the two Schüler cartridges. I am not aware whether the two GGCA print journals („Waidmannsheil“ and „Waffenschmied“) have covered the topic already, but a quick online access on the GGCA website may be convenient and informative for many readers:
https://germanhuntingguns.com/archives/richard-schuler-and-the-august-schuler-co/ (a very nice and tempting starter, but more invested in combined guns than the repeating rifles)

Here now are, nevertheless, the data that I could collect about the intended and designated buyer, the Dutch firm of Friedrich Hermann Tenhaeff (the German version of his first names is authentic, because his ancestors hailed from the nearby German counties of Wesel and Rees). The data have mostly been gleaned from the richly available Dutch online archives‘ sources, i.e. from marriage, naturalization, birth and death registers etc.

Nowadays, this elder Tenhaeff is – if at all – known in Utrecht not so much as a gunsmith & firearms dealer, but as the father of a well-known and highly esteemed scholar , namely the multitalented local and regional historian Nicolaas Bernardus Tenhaeff (born Utrecht, 21st September 1885, died Den Haag, 2nd Januar 1943). There was also another more famous professor Tenhaeff, a parapsychologist, who seems to have no direct connection to *this* branch of the Tenhaeff families though. Also, there are traces of one „Frederik Herman“, who however is NOT simply the rendered Dutch language version of our person, but somebody else. This Germanic „Friedrich Hermann“ here however may have retained his German citizenship, unlike others (the scholarly obituary of his son Bernardus retains a veiled indirect hint to this possibility).
Friedrich Hermann Tenhaeff was born on 23rd July 1853 and married Anna Niesje Maria Freken (born in Germany) 7th Dezember 1859) on 18. July 1883.
His own father (Carl Tenhaeff; born on 8th May 1820 in Wesel / Germany, married 2nd September 1850, died 9th August 1902) was at one time employed in a French firearms factory, but seems to have moved to Utrecht at some later time. They may also have been in Delft at some early time.
Friedrich Hermann Tenhaeff’s shop, probably also with his father’s final home in the same house, was for the longest time situated in the Lange Viestraat 19.
About the duration of this enterprise, Martin Tulp, in his magistral list of many Dutch firearms and ammunition dealers of yore, has listed only 1922 as the first covered date, and 1951 as the confirmed closure date, but the reason is simple: his research only began with the year 1922, when the shop already existed.
https://vvnw.nl/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/Nederlandse-wapenhandels-versie-8-september-2013.pdf
Actually, in another small local publication, a link to the duration of the trade (under the name of the firm, not necessarily during the life of F.H. T.) could be found:
„de firma F. H. Tenhaeff, is, na eenige jaren in de Potterstraat werkzaam te zijn geweest, van 1886 tot nu toe op Lange Viestraat 9 gevestigd.“
Source: Mandblaat van Out-Utrecht, May 1952, page 29:
https://oud-utrecht.nl/images/pdf-bestanden/Tijdschrift/MOUT_1952-05.pdf
That date „1886“ would mean that Tenhaeff may have started in the Potterstraat and had then, three years after marrying at 30 years of age, set up a new and maybe larger shop; this seems absolutely conclusive and realistic at that time, when people married late, and mostly only when they would reasonably expect to be able to sustain a family. And never mind the small mistake in the street address in the quoted text. 😉

The address book of the city of Utrecht (adresboek der stad Utrecht) of course also lists his trade; I found some digitalized copies on the ‘Net, but only for a few years.
Under the same shop address is also listed the gunsmith and lateron arms dealer (and probably at some time in 1920s co-proprietor, in what subsequently became a thus named joint enterprise) C. Verbeek, from 1917 to 1937 at least.
Tenhaeff’s private home address, also given in the address book in another section, was Burgstraat 7 in 1917, and then Mengelberglaan 7 in 1923.
His death notice is given as 8th May 1937, hence with 83 years; quite the same age as his father.

Best regards,

Carcano
(in civil life: Alexander)

Interesting dossier on Tenhaeff.

I don't think it was made around the time of the 1st Major Agreement in Europe as they held on to the powder load data. That was pretty much abandoned @ the time of the new proof rules. But then again we are only talking about a couple years.

If the longarm wasn't transferred, where did it stage until if found a primary Custodian?

Serbus,

Raimey
rse

Hello Raimey, thank you firstly very much for your follow-up. As you may see above, I have tried to ameliorate my posting a bit (including the Troisdorfer Pulver Nr. 6).
But primarily, I have re-examined my feelings or guesses about the time of the original proof (which need NOT - not at all - conincide with the production of the gun itself). There are but few specialists who can reliably assess the older style (pre-1939) of German proof stamps, and I would not really count myself among them. The 'Net has now added or unearthed a lot of previously forgotten knowledge, but most of it is hidden in widely spread postings in various fora, and deep within several websites. I have linked to one now (a multiply compiled GGCA webpage on August Schüler / Richard Schüler / ASS).

After the first or initial production, the gun was definitely still reworked some more. The former blade rear sight was taken out, its space in the barrel rib was filled up, as one can see, and instead this rear part was substituted by a furher rearward Lyman diopter. We cannot (or at least I do not) know whether that happened in Germany, in the Netherlands, or in the USA. The mere fact that the Lyman rear sight is "old" (how old exactly?) as such, says nothing about *when* it was mounted. That it may also have been used in the past (rarely!) in Germany, is true, but back then, it would be (very) atypical for a "dangerous big game" rifle, such as this.

The cushioned butt plate looks almost too fresh to be true. I would expect, even with very little use, a bit more age effect, were it really as old as the gun. It is far _more_ stylish though, than the new, icky bright orange or brick red "English" rubber buttplates that are so popular today.

Lastly, the bolt. That one is really is an issue of contention, and a triple or quadruple issue at that.

1. The bolt is NOT among those forms that I would expect or would have seen in the (comparatively few) Schüler rifles that have been reported and depicted variously by now, nor matches the advertisements. Neither in most Mauser rifles (and there are always the pesky exceptions). The characteristic Mod. 98 sporting or hunting rifle bolts have a diffent curvature and length of their bolt handles, or might have a flat spatula handle (Kammerlappen, flacher Kammergriff) altogether.

2. The bolt is in fact an ex-military Karabiner 98 AZ (later: Karabiner 98a) bolt. The bolt handle is very typical of this gun (or its Polish successor). Whether it was overproduction (which gunsmiths were able to "procure" cleverly quite early even in the very first decades of the Mod. 98) or leftover from the Great War or even later, I can not say. But Schüler certainly used military parts for building his guns.
2a. The bolt is almost unused, see the bolthead face.

3. The jewelling (Sonnenschliff) of the bolt side and / or the extractor is IMO (I may be wrong) quite unusual in early German rifles. For me, it screams "later".

4. Maybe most important, but we need an experienced longtime Mod. 98 military collector to be the arbiter on this often hot issue:
The flat of the bolt handle (where it meets the bolt body) appears definitely too new for me. Discerning Kar98k kollektors experience this all the time. It was filed, polished and matchingly re-stamped, I would say. Also, the number font in the "862" is ever so slightly *different* from the cipher font of the other serial numbers on this gun. Very minute, indeed, but perceptible.

Yes, it is not "impossible'" that ASS could have used a lie-around Karabiner 98AZ bolt, but _this_ one would definitely have been altered and reworked later. There are many potential reasons for this, and your guess is as good as mine.

Regards from Southwest Germany,

Carcano

Thank you Carcano,

I appreciate your taking the time to post such detailed information, and giving your opinions about my rifle.
So my questions continue: 1. Who built the rifle? ... 2. When was it made?

Subject longarm proof stamps

4000 Atmosphärenpulver Test Below






>>Crown - Crown over N - 2,6g G.B.P. /(over) St. m. G.<<






https://www.doublegunshop.com/forum...mp;Words=4000&Search=true#Post649752


I am inclined to believe that the platform wears the 4000 Atmosphärenpulver Test, or some variant thereof.

Serbus,

Raimey
rse

Elaborate dissection of each component of the platform via your monocle of time. I may to try to draw in Steve Whitley and see if he will chime in on it.

If you are going to dabble in the realm of the Troisdorfer powder, for the most part that found favour with Collath & his doings...


Serbus,

Raimey
rse

1. Mostly likely the firm of August Schüler, at that time already under the real or even nominal direction of Richard. No other realistic candidate. The barrel maker can be found out, and maybe one of our usual suspects :-* in the various fora could help in this quest. Axel? Raimey? Mike Ford? Algmule? Hendrik? Lancaster? Also, the "U with rhombus" signet is one that I must have seen at one time. This too can be deciphered eventually.

2. Time frame (FRAME) of the proof stamp can be more reliably guessed by my betters. Probably as an "after, but before" frame.

3. It would be worth the sweat of the noblemen (German idiom) to compile all the posted photos of various Schüler rifles on the 'Net, in their respective proprietary chamberings, over the last 25 years or so, including their serial numbers, and then to compare them, and try to establish patterns and/or changes. Catalogues and advertisements can also help a bit, but only a *BIT*, since they very frequently illustrate but intent and dream. ("Yes, we *could* possibly produce this gun in this calibre if enough people were really interested...").

4. I have no idea what happened with (or to) Harald Wolf's collected sources and archival materials on Schüler, after his death 2019, but I sincerely hope some aficionado has eventually taken care of them... hope he does not hover over them like Smaug (Fafnir for Wagnerians).

Carcano

"Dabble" is probably the right verb. Propellant history is a separate and arcane field of research. I guess one should approach the grand master Wolfgang Seel for the factory histories (his new ammunition, or rather "munitions" book !!) and the IAA for the loadings. The two "Schießtechnische Handbücher" of RWS only list a few loads with Troisdorfer Nr. 1910 und Nr. 1912 (while far more of their cartridges have "R" Rottweiler powders).

Carcano

I think Gerhard Wirnsberger's text is still quite applicable but it has to be taken for it's position in time. His effort is a „Snap-Shot“ in time of a proof process which also was a series „Snap-Shots“ in time defining the process of Protecting the Public with regards to Sporting Weapons, over time. But almost every phrase, if not every word, has to be dissected similar to your efforts of this purported >>Schüler<< Bolt Gun. It just takes time to digest it and dissect it. Folks now want a push button world via AI and very specific answers out to the nano-metre realm.

Hochachtungsvoll,

Raimey
rse

I totally agree on the >>Sonnenschliff<< as Dietrich Apel always told me that such an effort was that of a Z-M mechanic & was to „Cover - Up“ shotty work or something similar.

Serbus,

Raimey
rse

What about the misspelling of „Fluß“ Stahl¿ Where does that fall in the scheme of things¿

Are you a Carcano fanatic, dabbled in the Kennedy Assassination or just fancy a 7,35 mm genoß/bullet¿

Serbus,

Raimey
rse

Just a misreading.
It's GUSS there, not FUSS.
Just peruse again, attentively.

Carcano

Oh, so it has been confirmed by as a >>G<< and the below still applies:


>>„Einen anderen Prima Fried. Krupp gibt in den allgemein gebräuchlichen Gewehrlaufstahl – Qualitäten, das sind: Krupp’s Guss-Stahl zu Kugelläufen und Krupp’s Fluss-Stahl zu Schrotläufen, an andere Jagdgewehr-Fabrikanten keine besseren Marken ab, als an uns, sodass also die Bezeichnunb:

Prima Kurppscher Gewehrlauf-Stahl
Als nicht zutreffend bezeichnet werden muss.“<<

I guess the font of each text segment appears to be the same.

Serbus,

Raimey
rse

The apparent trade distinction between "Flußstahl" and "Gußstahl" (I am here purposely using the OLD orthography, which however also resolved the minuscule "ß" as a majuscule "SS" - the pressing aesthetic question of a potential capital letter "ß", itself an old ligature from handwriting times, is a beautiful quisquilia of German typographical debates), this distinction is a bit, how should I say it, un-intuitive, because in common layperson language, both would seem to mean the same.
But we would have to ask a German metallurgian (old term: Hüttenmann) about this, I guess. I have dutifully tried to educate myself via the German Wikipedia, but failed to comprehend the apparently subtle difference. :-/

Carcano

Oh, we fancy the antiquated Fratur, Waidmannssprachel, Old German for things Hunting and Calligraphy here. Actually I read 1800s Calligraphy almost daily where folk held to the European modell of value notation with a comma.

But the steel strength is the main reason for the Fluid for Scatterguns & Cast for Rifles. It must have been most difficult, or more difficult, to bore a larger scattergun diameter thru a rod of Cast Steel(Guß Stahl) after being converted from Bar Stock, where a pilot hole was drilled to form a rough, bored tube in Liège. Krupp, along with German Gunmakers, found trademark protection in Belgium and sourced the bulk of their rough bored tubes from the talented mechanics in Liège. So the Liège mechanics may have set the tone for which steel type married with which sporting platform.

One exception just may be Witten? But I know not where these were rolled before Mechanic Gottgetreu commenced his craft.

>>Diese Vervollkommnung der deutschen Flinten ist zum gro�en Teil der deutschen Stahlindustrie zu verdanken. W�hrend die deutschen Gewehrfabriken fr�her ganz auf die ausl�ndischen Damastl�ufe angewiesen waren verarbeiten sie heute ausschlie�lich die un�bertrefflichen, silberleinen, deutschen Stahll�ufe. Die besten L�ufe liefern die Kruppschen Werke unter dem Namen "Spezialgewehrlauf Stahl von Friedrich Krupp Essen" und die Stahlwerke in Witten unter der Marke "Excelsior Witten". An diese deutschen Edelstahl Sorten reicht kein ausl�ndisches Erzeugnis heran. Jedoch ist der weiche z�he Gewehrlaufstahl lediglich f�r Flintenl�ufe verwendbar w�hrend f�r B�chsl�ufe ein festerer h�rterer Stahl von Krupp Essen verarbeitet wird.
Kosmos 1906<<

I'll work on the missing characters that were not allowed on a previous platform here.

>>A most interesting tid-bit/golden nugget of info by Axel E. on the GGCA site centred around Witten tubes regarding mechanic Joh(?) Werner Gottgetreu of Suhl. Axel E. attributes the G encircled W surmounted by a cross as possibly that of Joh. Werner Gottgetreu & I believe him to be correct. Joh. Werner Gottgetreu obtained his master's sheepskin by 1845 & it would appear he attained that rank by 1840/1841. He departed this life in 1919. I'm sure the possibility exists there were 2 generations of Werner Gottgetreu as being active 80 years is a lengthy span. Anyway, more diggin' there and this may bring more questions than answers. But I'm curious if there are any Witten Excelsior tubesets pre-1919 that do not wear the G encircled W surmounted by a Cross and at what state he sourced the tubes? I had always associated the mark w/ the Witten steel mark, situated between HAL control mark & the steel type stamp, so it passed by without suspicion. <<

https://www.doublegunshop.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=445681

Hochachtungsvoll,

Raimey
rse

Seems Witten Excelsior was a tad bit softer, with the addition of Phosphorus; hence the use for Scattergun Tubes.

>>Seems the Tiegelstahl - Qualitätsmarke Excelsior(Wittener Exzelsiorstahl) or crucible steel gained new ground by the turn of the 20th Century(mid to late 1890s?). It was akin to Wootz and may have met its match w/ the advent of the electric furnaces by WWI.<<

https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stahlerzeugung#Historische_Verfahren

Hochachtungsvoll,

Raimey
rse

I was searching for the typical Guß-Stahl Witten stamp, which would be for another thread, but I did find an advert from the 1930s for Edel - Baustähle for Ruhrstahl A.G. - Gußstahlwerke - Witten. Anyway, this just may prompt me to wad thru all the Daly threads again......


Hochachtungsvoll,

Raimey
rse

I agree, I don’t believe the bolt is original, I don’t care for the font nor its application, it’s also not a 98a bolt, there is no flat on it. Curiously however, on earlier JP Sauer Mausers, I have observed bolts with a similar odd bend on more than one occasion, so there is a chance it is a “period” bolt of some sort but subsequently modified. Also as an aside, there are other sources for “flat bottom” bolts, namely Mauser Oberndorf during the last few years of their production, but the bend itself is not that of the Kar98a, and many of them feature an internal detent in the root.

Back to the rifle, retailer attributions aside, we know it went to South Africa.. as the Diamond U, is a military marking for out of service for the Union Defense Forces. The majority of these markings appear on Portuguese 1904 Mausers, but also Gewehr 98’s, Enfields etc, they had a hodgepodge of weapons due to their sourcing at the time. All in all, a semi original rifle, in a wonderful cartridge, and with a very cool history. I’ve been keeping track of it since it popped up in 2024. Maybe we can answer more of the questions we have on it in time.