Below is the only photo of the rifle I’ve been able to find. It’s out of focus, but perhaps good enough. There are various online news claims that it’s a “World War I” rifle, obviously referring to its being identified as the German army weapon of that era.

My first question is that claim accurate? It could have been rechambered for the 30-06 Springfield cartridge, but even to my inexpert eye the rifle doesn’t appear to be a “sporterized” military rifle. If I were asked, I’d say it looks like a common reasonably-modern hunting rifle.

My suspicion is that some reporter found some firearms “expert” who, when told it was a Mauser 98 immediately jumped to the conclusion it was a converted military rifle, perhaps because he didn’t even know that M98 rifles are produced and sold today. But what say the authorities?

Second, it’s widely being reported that the rifle does not have a serial number. It’s true that prior to the GCA of 1968 rifles didn’t have to have serial numbers, but in my limited experience manufacturers generally numbered their guns except for the very inexpensive models such as 22LR rifles. How likely is it that even a commercial Mauser rifle wouldn’t have a serial number? Also, and this is what I’m asking, would a German military rifle from any time in the 20th century really not have a serial number? From what (little, I admit) I’ve seen the usual practices of military powers was to mark every major part of a rifle with at least part of the basic serial number.

Anyway, is it likely the rifle really has no marked serial number regardless of whether it was a converted military weapon or commercial gun?
Or did the killer’s text stating that he didn’t know if it had a serial number get picked up and reported as some sort of semiofficial statement?

Last, one commentator remarked about how the riflescope is mounted as far back in the rings as is possible. He evidently talked to someone who knew something about guns because he claimed that because the scope was mounted that far back, shooting the rifle would have automatically resulted in a scope bite. In comparing the position of the scope to my own, though, it looks about where I would have mounted the scope, with the eyepiece slightly forward of the rear of the pistol grip of the stock.
Comments?

Not enough information.

Mauser 98 rifles have been produced since... well... 1898. And they're still in production today.

They were made in many different configurations, for many different purposes and contracts, by a whole slew of different companies besides just Mauser, for both commercial and military sales. Literally hundreds or thousands of different variations. But they all used the same Mauser 1898 pattern receiver.

So it certainly could be a WW1-era Mauser 98 receiver that's been rebarreled, had scope mounts added, and was put in an aftermarket stock. Or it could be a pre-WW1 or post-WW1 Mauser 98 receiver. Could be military surplus, or could be commercial. No way to tell currently.

We'd need better pics of the receiver markings (if any) to start trying to figure that out. There's nothing of substance that we can tell from that lone photo, other than that it does appear to be a rifle with a Mauser 98 receiver.


Likewise, no way to tell about the serial number with the current information available.

It's possible that it never had a serial if it was a pre-1968 commercial rifle.

Also might be that the serial and other markings were just buffed/ground off during one or more rounds of sporterization/refinishing during its life.

Or while most Mauser 98 pattern rifles typically have a serial number on the left side of the receiver, it's also possible that this was produced by some company over the last 127 years that put them in a nontraditional location, like the original serial is on the top of the receiver ring and it was simply covered up when scope mounts were added later.

There's also the distinct possibility that the rifle does actually have a serial number, someone in the media just got it wrong, and it's been misreported ad nauseum since.

quote:

Originally posted by RogueJSK:
There's also the distinct possibility that the rifle does actually have a serial number, someone in the media just got it wrong, and it's been misreported ad nauseum since.

As occurred to me, but it will be interesting to learn the facts if they are ever reported.*

And as always, thanks for your informative discussion; I was hoping you’d chime in. It didn’t occur to me that the question would be complicated by the fact that not all “Mausers” are actually Mausers.

* For some of us, anyway, as strange as it may seem to raise a question about a firearm on a firearms-related discussion forum.

quote:

Originally posted by sigfreund:
It didn’t occur to me that the question would be complicated by the fact that not all “Mausers” are actually Mausers.

Think of the Mauser 98 as sort of akin to the AR-15.

Initially designed and made by Mauser/Armalite, but over the years a whole slew of different companies have made rifles using Mauser 98/AR-15 receivers in a bunch of different models and configurations, and then gunsmiths and owners have customized them further.

It's a common pattern of receiver/action, not a lone model of rifle from a single manufacturer.