Talk:Karabiner 98k/Archive 1

Wartime production
When you say "Wartime Production" do you refer to WWI or WWII?
 * WW2, obviously, since the rifle this article is talking about is the Kar98k, which was introduced in 1935. Kar98 04:09, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

Merging?
I merged the other articles, but its still quite rough. Perhaps the whole thing should just be merged with Mauser? Gewhere 08:36, 14 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Kar 98 and Russian winters
I heard numerous times that German precision backfired (pardon the pun) during the bitterly cold Russian winters. Extreme cold made the already close tolerances shrink to the point where the rifle would jam. Can anyone confirm this? - Emt147
 * Unlikely, or why would there have been a special winter trigger (to squeeze the trigger while wearing thick woolen mittens) to be used in extreme cold? Kar98 04:09, 30 January 2006

(UTC)

The modified trigger does not disprove the story since the Kar98 was Germany's service rifle and they had no alternative but to do their best to make it work. What is more I've never heard of a special winter trigger but only a winter trigger guard which was indeed designed to allow firing with thick winter glvoes. I have also never heard any inkling that the Mauser has ever failed in that way due to extreme cold or for any other reason. To my knowledge the Mosin-Nagant the Russians used was not all that different in terms of "tolerances" than the Mauser design. The whole bit about making tolerances loose has a lot more to do with the AK-47/M-16 debate than it does with the history of WWII bolt action rifles. Carambola


 * Link to: winter trigger repro. Kar98 19:29, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

Use by Portugal
Wasn't the Karabiner 98k used by Portugal from like 1936? I seem to remember reading it somewhere. --204.185.158.134 17:04, 7 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Yes, M/937.--81.197.218.62 17:10, 11 March 2006 (UTC)

Karabiner 98K and China?
As I understand it the 98K was used agaisnt the Japanese by Chinese nationalist forces who were given and sold a large amount of German weapons by Hitler, to fight the communists. I mention it, because the 800 heroes were supposed to have been armed with mostly German arms. V. Joe 23:55, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

Oops
No, apparently the Chinese were mostly armed with Gehewr 98s. V. Joe 23:57, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
 * This isn't something noteworthy as dozens of other groups were armed with German bolt action rifles of various flavors during the time.--Asams10 00:08, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

I have an Isralie 98K
The Waffenamt markings were not removed or the chamber markings as stated in the article. So when it as rebuilt and rechambered they just added the caliber change, I guess it was not done to all Nazi issue 98Ks. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Web455 (talk • contribs) 05:10, 7 March 2007 (UTC).

Nazi Germany
Dear All,

what I really dislike is the term "Nazi Germany". Weapons designed in Germany should be described as "German". No one would refer to a Weapon designed in "Roosevelt-USA" or Churchill-UK.

Therefore "Place of origin" "Germany"!

Greetings to all Roland (owning a fine Mosin-Nagant-Rifle) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.238.45.252 (talk • contribs)
 * See Talk:Gewehr 43 for a previous discussion of this subject.--Sus scrofa 15:28, 12 June 2007 (UTC)


 * hmmm, Hitler cannot really be compared with Churchill nor Roosevelt... :( Paris By Night 15:35, 30 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Nazi Germany sounds just as Communist Russia... I guess you can say it if you want to stress that it's about the Nazi period of Germany. Nevertheless, I prefer the term 3rd Reich which is also the most used term in Germany. On the other hand one should really be more sensible about the attribute Nazi German - as in Nazi German Wehrmacht or Nazi German rifle since in implies a political assumption towards everything German which isn't justified in most cases.--MacX85 (talk) 07:13, 17 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Don't mean to be, well, mean, but this discussion is rather old and took place on the other page mentioned. Please don't play the field with this discussion and make different points on different articles, go the the Gewehr 43 discussion. --Nukes4Tots (talk) 11:14, 17 October 2008 (UTC)

false statements about indochina war
this sentence about the french using nazi 98k is false! actually french and State of Vietnam (bao dai loyalist) 98k were viet minh captured! this vietnamese para holds a viet minh captured 98k bayonet. actually the nazi gave weapon (mostly Mauser) and trained the taiwanese army and these weapons were captured by Mao's communist army. then mao passed his captured weapon to his viet minh allies that ended on french and anti-communist vietnamese hands. Paris By Night 04:10, 30 June 2007 (UTC)
 * another one! (both reportages are coming from the French Defense Ministry archives ECPAD), this anticommunist vietnamese para holds a captured Karabiner 98k w/bayonet. please change the sentence, i have no time now. Paris By Night 04:36, 30 June 2007 (UTC)
 * i have corrected it, by the way may i remember you the US massively supplied the soviet with arms during WWII as they were fighting the nazi as well. Paris By Night 05:41, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

New pic
just wanted to say i really like it, it shows u exactly what the gun is like which amny gun pictues dont do( like the one for the standard french military sniper rifle or sometin) good job whoever took it(ForeverDEAD 05:05, 9 August 2007 (UTC))

ok!
That was me. Thanks. The rifle pictured previously was a postwar Czech rifle, with slight differences from the true, original German version. I selected a photo of a typical midwar rifle of German manufacture, as I felt it was more in the spirit of showing what the article depicted. The rifle is a dot 1943, and is from my collection. (ditch68 12:15, 9 August 2007 (UTC))

Man your lucky to have such a nice rifle like that(ForeverDEAD 20:53, 12 August 2007 (UTC))

Disassembly
would it be helpful to write disassembly instuctions for the K98? I would document it with pictures of my own prewar K98k. However, I am not sure if this falls under the scope of the article. please comment. --Boris Barowski 11:51, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
 * No, Disassembly involves pulling the lever on the outside of the receiver and pulling the bolt out. That doesn't seem to be relevant.--Asams10 12:37, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
 * you could disassemble it further, dismantle the bolt, remove the front rings and stock, trigger housing,... --Boris Barowski 13:02, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Post-war production
Shouldn't the userbox's production info include the post-war K98k rifles produced by CZ & FN? &mdash; Red XIV (talk) 06:29, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

5.56x45mm Mauser edit
I have tried to edit in the past, but all attempts have failed. Therefore I am leaving this error (probably vandalism in this poster's view)to a seasoned vet to be fixed.

The article notes that the K98 fired the 5.56x45mm Mauser. No such caliber exists, nor was the K98 produced in said fictional caliber. The K98 was produced in 7.92x57 mm (8mm) Mauser for German service can be found in various other calibers. I due apologize for not being able to fix this, but thought it would be good to note it. Thank you for your understanding. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.217.130.200 (talk) 02:39, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

I've reverted the vandalism. The article history does not show you as having edited it, so in all likelihood your edit didn't go through for some reason. But I can tell this, no one reverted your attempts to revert the vandalism. Thanks for bringing this to our attention.--LWF (talk) 02:43, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

500 Metres?
In the article, it says "Just like its predecessor, the rifle was noted for its reliability, good accuracy and an effective range of up to 500 meters (547 yards) with iron sights." The M16A2 is accurate at 500 metres; later,it says "The standard Karabiner 98k iron sights could be regulated for ranges from 100 m up to 2000 m in 100 m increments." A skilled marksman with good vision could hit targets beyond 500 yards w/o telescopic sights. --AtTheAbyss (talk) 04:33, 15 August 2008 (UTC)


 * For a marksman with good vision it mainly depends on the target size presented to the iron sights. The K98k standard iron sights consist of quite big/course aiming elements making it suitable for rough field handling and low light usage, but less suitable for aiming at small point targets. Alternative after market K98k iron (peep)sights are available to make the rifle better suited for match shooting usage. Many pre WW2 bolt action rifles where designed with area fire targets like charging horseman units in mind, so the standard sights could often be calibrated for very long ranges.--Francis Flinch (talk) 07:59, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:German sniper screenshot.jpg
The image Image:German sniper screenshot.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check


 * That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
 * That this article is linked to from the image description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Media copyright questions. --01:29, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

G33/40
If the G33/40 is a Mauser Kar98k variant is doubtful. Sources like http://www.wehrmacht-awards.com/uniforms_firearms/firearms/98k/k98index.htm, http://www.fmft.net/archives/003057.html or http://www.mausercentral.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=20804 say it was a German adaptation of the Czech vz. 33 rifle that was essentially a Czech Mauser 98 look alike rifle. The G40k mentioned in the articles variants section was a true shortened Kar98k version, but was never produced in significant numbers. If you can find internet sources that declare the G33/40 a Kar98k variant that will make the G33/40 classification debatable. For now I will remove the G33/40 reference. If you can provide references regarding the G33/40 the link can be restored.--Francis Flinch (talk) 09:09, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

Need to find another K98 Image
Currently showcased is a K98 that has a heavily sanded stock and a highly polished bolt, quite contrary to how they were originally designed. Brenden (talk) 09:45, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

Karabiner is not carbine !
I believe there is some misunderstanding concerning this term.

Back then in German language the word "karabiner" was used to designate any rifle with side sling swivels, therefore intended primarily (but not solely) for cavalry use. No matter how long it was. K98k had side swivels (despite being an infantry weapon), and that is why it was called "Karabiner", not because it was shorter then the rifle. Actualy some "karabiners" could be LONGER then rifles of corresponding models.

This all is confusing indeed because in modern German this term actually means a shorter breed of a rifle, and so is a direct translation of the English word "carbine". But as I assume this is not our case. So I think it should be mentioned in the article.

Also, taking that into account, I believe this phrase -

Since the Karabiner 98k rifle was shorter than the earlier Karabiner 98b (the 98b was a carbine in name only, a version of Gewehr 98 long rifle with upgraded sights), it was given the designation Karabiner 98 Kurz, meaning "Carbine 98 Short".

- should be corrected. Both (98b & 98k) were not carbines (not "in name only"), but "long rifles" with side sling swivels. 98k was a shorter and lighter rifle, not a carbine.

95.79.211.21 (talk) 09:03, 22 September 2010 (UTC)


 * Is there any relation to the Karabiner 98a variant, which was according to the Gewehr 98 article a shortened lighter variant of the Gewehr 98 and even marginally shorter compared to the Karabiner 98 Kurz? If so this could be incorporated in the Karabiner 98 Kurz article.--Francis Flinch (talk) 11:32, 22 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Well look at this image, it depicts all commonly seen members of Mauser 98 family: (from top to bottom)


 * * 8-6. Gewehr 98 infantry rifle (note how the swivels are positioned)
 * * 8-7. Karabiner 98 (much shorter then the rifle, also with side swivels and curved "cavalry"-style bolt handle and Lange system rear sight, which was used with early ball-nosed bullets - this design didn't last for long)
 * * 8-8. Karabiner 98a (only slightly shorter then the rifle, originally was just Kar 98, later (a) letter designation was added when Kar 98(b) was introduced)
 * * 8-9. Karabiner 98b (the same length as the rifle !)
 * * 8-10. Karabiner 98k (Kurzen/shortened karabiner, otherwise identical to 98(b))
 * * 8-11. Karabiner 98k (simplified war-time production)
 * * 8-12. Gewehr (!) 33/40 (shorter then the karabiner, but with "infantry" swivels again, of Chechoslovakian origin)


 * Among them, only Karabiner 98 (no letter designation) and strangely enough Gewehr 33/40 are real carbines, as I assume.


 * 95.79.211.21 (talk) 13:17, 22 September 2010 (UTC)

Shouldn't the specifications come before the Links?
I don't know how to fix it though... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.172.99.223 (talk) 20:59, 29 April 2005 (UTC)

False designation.
This article states that the pre-WWII version of the K98 was designated the K98k, which is false. The Mauser, Model 1898 was designated K98 through WWI and up until Hitler took power, at which point the barrel was shortened, under his instruction, and was then designated the K98k Karibiner model 1898, kurz [carbine, model 1898, short]. The original Model 1898 Mauser was much longer than the K98, thus the "carbine" being adopted, as was the same case with the adoption of the Mosin Nagant series of rifles by Imperial Russia / Soviet Union. The "carbine" version was adopted, as it was still very long and heavy. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.17.141.169 (talk) 01:40, 1 September 2006 (UTC) '''i thought the ww1 gun was the Gewehr 98? No? plz tell me-''' — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.195.137.154 (talk) 18:45, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

Difference in Tolerances.
A person above stated that the Mauser was not all that different in tolerances from the Mosin-Nagant, this is untrue. The Mosin Nagant rifle was designed and built to much looser tolerances than the Mauser. This is evident through their choice of a rimmed cartridge instead of the newer designs which would have required the machining in the rifles to be much more precise. The Mauser was built to very close tolerances, but there have never been any reports of the rifle jamming up or even backfiring in the Russian winter. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.17.141.169 (talk) 01:45, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

Downgraded
I downgraded this article because although there is a lot of information, not that much is referenced, which is required for B-class articles. I will look some stuff up, but hope that everyone can add fitting references too. Until then, I will leave this article "start" class. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Boris Barowski (talk • contribs) 14:35, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

Scope Confusion
I was reading this article when I noticed the fact that in the History section, the article refers to a 8x scope, which is not refered to anywhere else in the article. Neither the Sights section in Design Details or the Sniper Varient section in Variants talk about it either. However, The Sniper Varient section does refer to a 4x and 6x scope, is this perhapes what the author/s of the History section ment?


 * The German military installed many telescopic sight/mount combinations on Karabiner 98 during World War II, so what you read regarding an 8x aiming optic can be perfectly correct.--Francis Flinch (talk) 08:00, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

G40k simulation
User Francis Flinch deleted the "original research" tag under the G40k subsection. This does not make sense. An uncited engineering simulation is original research if I ever saw it. I am reverting it to contain the original research flag and if there is further challenge to this decision then it should be taken to the talk page. Kbog (talk) 07:44, 6 November 2012 (UTC)


 * Yeah, I think I agree that this needs to be sourced. Not that the numbers are necessarily incorrect but it's best to ground the information in a source to avoid debates about the accuracy of the data.--Sus scrofa (talk) 09:34, 6 November 2012 (UTC)


 * I have no problems with the "original research" tag in the G40k subsection. The numbers are quite close as pendulum tests yield very similar results when compared to decent calculations. The main variable is the exact burning behavior of the propellant used in the cartridge. Sadly the burning behavior of propellants changes during aging and shows inevitable production lots variations, so measurements and calculations can always be debated. You probably will have concluded now that it makes sense to test stockpiled older military ammunition batches to measure if they are still safe and otherwise fit for service use. Of course specialized laboratories can and do conduct such tests.--Francis Flinch (talk) 10:20, 6 November 2012 (UTC)

Main Image
The main image for the article has a shorter barrel than all other images on the page and any German Karabiner 98k I have seen. Is this a picture of a different variant or a foreign model, if so isn't it a poor choice for the main image as it is showing a different rifle? --Optimash Prime (talk) 11:33, 7 September 2012 (UTC)


 * The infobox image should of course be of the most representative example of the subject. I tried finding out if the image is of some experimental or other variant at the given source ( in Swedish) but all it says is that it was made in 1939 in Germany and that it is a "rifle m/1898 K", and that it was donated by the Swedish Army in 1953. It's possible that this was some sort of experimental variant modified in Germany or Sweden, but I can't really tell.--Sus scrofa (talk) 12:34, 7 September 2012 (UTC)


 * Well in any case it just doesn't look like any other Kar98k any of us have seen, so why don't we put back the picture that was there before? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.51.57.78 (talk) 19:33, 24 March 2013 (UTC)
 * I have switched places for two images in the article so that we get a more typical Kar98k in the infobox. Thomas.W (talk) 20:12, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

North Vietnam?
I've seen book references and photographic evidence of North Vietnamese soldiers with the Chiang Kai-shek rifle, but not Mauser 98K. Does anyone have a cite for the latter? Thanks.-- Surv1v4l1st (Talk 01:17, 28 September 2013 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 1 one external link on Karabiner 98k. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20070403044329/http://www.rememuseum.org.uk:80/arms/blade/armbay.htm to http://www.rememuseum.org.uk/arms/blade/armbay.htm#304

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Cheers. —cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 14:20, 17 October 2015 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 7 one external links on Karabiner 98k. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.rememuseum.org.uk/arms/blade/armbay.htm#304
 * Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20110713115537/http://www.johnrigbyandco.com/html/AfricanExpressBoltRifle.html to http://www.johnrigbyandco.com/html/AfricanExpressBoltRifle.html
 * Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20110530003208/http://www.huntinglegends.com:80/rigby-and-mauser to http://www.huntinglegends.com/rigby-and-mauser/
 * Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20120310000823/http://www.zastava-arms.rs/cms/index.php?id=248 to http://www.zastava-arms.rs/cms/index.php?id=248
 * Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20120310001020/http://www.zastava-arms.rs/cms/index.php?id=184 to http://www.zastava-arms.rs/cms/index.php?id=184
 * Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20120306182651/http://www.mnhm.lu/pageshtml/virtualmuseumtour.php to http://www.mnhm.lu/pageshtml/virtualmuseumtour.php
 * Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20051212064849/http://www.carbinesforcollectors.com:80/israeli.html to http://www.carbinesforcollectors.com/israeli.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 07:50, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

Orphaned references in Karabiner 98k
I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of Karabiner 98k's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.

Reference named "jones2009": From PPSh-41:  From Service rifle: Jones, Richard D. Jane's Infantry Weapons 2009/2010. Jane's Information Group; 35th edition (January 27, 2009). ISBN 978-0-7106-2869-5. From Steyr AUG: Jones, Richard D. Jane's Infantry Weapons 2009/2010. Jane's Information Group; 35 edition (27 January 2009). ISBN 978-0-7106-2869-5. From M47 Dragon: Jones, Richard D. Jane's Infantry Weapons 2009/2010. Jane's Information Group; 35 edition (January 27, 2009). ISBN 978-0-7106-2869-5. From Steyr SSG 69: Jones, Richard D. Jane's Infantry Weapons 2009/2010. Jane's Information Group; 35 edition (January 27, 2009). ISBN 978-0-7106-2869-5. 

I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT ⚡ 09:05, 24 June 2017 (UTC)

"German small arms doctrine"
This article is misleading. The reason why the germans entered the war with the K98k as the primary weapon was that Hitler thought that rifles wouldn't play a major part in modern warfare. Wars would be won by tanks and airplanes. This was derived from the experience in WW1, where rifle bullets only accounted for 5% of the casualties. So the MG34 was only a small part of the doctrine, the entire "Blitzkrieg-doctrine" was about mobility, and even though tanks and airplanes aren't "small arms", it should be noted that the "small arms doctrine" was a part of a "combined arms doctrine". On top of that the K98k was relatively cheap to produce, compared to a semi-automatic rifle, required less time and less material. While it is true that in the first phase of the war MG units had their riflemen mainly to carry ammo and provide covering fire, that "doctrine" changed several times during the war. Of course it changed in the USSR when the german army was engaged in battles where both the MG34/42 and K98 were a disadvantage, for example in close quarter combat in wooded areas and urban warfare. The semi-automatic rifles were not an "experiment", they were an integral part of "a" new doctrine. Since Germany was increasingly lacking the ability to produce tanks, armoured cars and airplane, they had to rely on the firepower of the individual soldier. Yet they faced problems: 1) raw materials and time pressure 2) the time consuming and expensive retooling of the factories, and 3) they couldn't make a clear decision how to specifically change their armament: how many MP's, how many STG's, how many leMG's and how many K98's. That was due to the fact that the situation on the fronts got worse, and the STG's mass production got postponed because of concerns that not enough ammunition could be produced. What's also strange is that the authors gives precise numbers for K43's and STG's, but their full production number post february 1945 can only be estimated. It should in that context also be noted that the K98k's advantage was it's ability to be used as a grenade launcher. From just 1942 to 1945 Germany produced 67 million rifle grenades. These rifle grenades could only be fired from a 8x57 rifle, it could not be fired from the K43, since it could have damaged the gas system.

So that "small arms doctrine" article give the reader a wrong impression.2003:D1:B3C1:3A01:9DFD:1A8:B501:A2E5 (talk) 05:30, 17 November 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Karabiner 98k. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080202165720/http://tirmilitairefabrice.ifrance.com/site%20mauser1/Kar%2098%20k.htm to http://tirmilitairefabrice.ifrance.com/site%20mauser1/Kar%2098%20k.htm
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080202165720/http://tirmilitairefabrice.ifrance.com/site%20mauser1/Kar%2098%20k.htm to http://tirmilitairefabrice.ifrance.com/site%20mauser1/Kar%2098%20k.htm
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081005230128/http://www.carbinesforcollectors.com/port.html to http://www.carbinesforcollectors.com/port.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 04:50, 6 December 2017 (UTC)

a comment
"Many of the liberated European countries...." "liberated" in imagination — Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.251.7.112 (talk) 18:29, 21 May 2018 (UTC)