Doed the design of the Kar 98k have any issues compared to other bolt action rifles of WW2?
Posted by No_Dress_2107@reddit | ForgottenWeapons | View on Reddit | 46 comments
Im trying to get familiar with this weapon. If you have any nitpicks, id like to hear them.
Adventurous-Tie-1624@reddit
The problem with the K98k is that it took more manhours and machine time to build than a No.4.
If you're going to be stuck with a bolt action, a bolt action with 10rds and aperture sights that takes less resources to build is superior.
Arguably, they should have adopted something pretty close to the eventual VG-1 in 1942.
Quarterwit_85@reddit
Huh, is that true?
I would have thought enfield a more complicated design. Just thinking through the machining of the threads for the bolt head, loads more pieces to the stock. I would have thought the No4 would be close, but not have the K98 pipped for production time.
KaijuTia@reddit
The Enfield design has much more wiggle room when it comes to machining tolerances, since it has rear locking lugs, swappable bolt heads for adjust headspacing, and a rimmed cartridge that headspaces of the rim. The bolt and chamber/receiver are machines pretty loosely and you just swap parts till you get an acceptable fit.
Mausers have front locking lugs and a bolt that is made oversized and then machined down a teeny bit at a time until the bolt fits into the chamber like a condom. That precision has benefits, such as strict interchangeability (which the Enfield lacks) and better bench accuracy. But that precision comes at a cost.
The Mauser action is the Rolls-Royce of bolt actions for a reason. And Rolls-Royces aren’t cheap.
Quarterwit_85@reddit
Huh, that makes sense. Can just bulk make bolts and swap out the heads until it passes a go/no go gauge. No fitting, cutting and turning of the barrel to make the correct headspace.
KaijuTia@reddit
Exactly. The rear locking lugs means you don't actually need the bolt to fit INTO the chamber/receiver, so you get way more leeway with your tolerances. Even the chamber itself is cut pretty generously, which is why it's totally normal to get bulging around the base of the case in an Enfield, when that kind of bulging in a Mauser would be a VERY big problem. Downside is, you can't just take the bolt from one Enfield and put it into another, because they likely don't have the same headspaced bolt head.
It's a balance between precision and reliability vs cost and speed of production.
Quarterwit_85@reddit
Huh. There you go.
Nicest interaction I’ve had on the internet this year - cheers mate!
Hump_Back_Chub@reddit
Yet by most estimates more K98ks were made in 10 years from 35-45’ than all marks and variations of the Lee Enfield over a period of time five times greater. Perhaps the individual time to make each rifle is greater. But evidently it wasn’t that big of an issue. This isn’t even accounting the other 80,000,000 or so Mauser 98 pattern rifles produced.
Kumirkohr@reddit
Yeah, because the Enfield was made by the British government for the British military and the Commonwealth and the K98k was made by Mauser for anyone with money and want of a rifle
Of course the production numbers are going to be different
Hump_Back_Chub@reddit
I’d like to point out that the K98k was specifically manufactured for the Wehrmacht. Yes several contract runs were made for other powers. However, the majority were made for, issued to, fielded by, and lost in combat by the Wehrmacht. Approximately 15 million K98ks specifically. Per my comment, the other Mauser 98 pattern rifles that were made “for anyone with money” were of any of dozens of variants made under contract for various powers by a plurality of manufacturers. These number in the very high tens of millions, if not low hundred millions. But they were not specifically K98ks, and therefore are not relevant to this post.
Kumirkohr@reddit
Made for the Wehrmacht under contract because they finally admitted the Gewehr 98 was (like all other “full length” service rifles) too damn long. The K98k didn’t arise as some sort of Aryan super weapon derived from the Platonic Ideal of the bolt-action rifle.
What became the Gewehr 98 was already in production by Mauser and sold around the world as the Mauser Model 1895 when the German Empire decided to replace the Gewehr 88 commission rifle.
DragonSlayr4141@reddit
In a real world military context the 5 vs 10 round distinction is largely insignificant
Joseph9877@reddit
Length of action (but you can get magnum ones made now) restricting calibre. Wobbly bolt when open (it's a feature,not a big). Most people more their head to cycle the bolt (but most can actually do it while still looking down the sights, just don't like it). Expensive to make compared with some designs.
Nothing that really matters for a war small arms.
sd4f@reddit
I like the design of the m98 action, it's arguably peak bolt action design, where essentially nothing new has really been introduced since. Either derivatives of what has been before, or simplifications.
With that said, the no4 lee Enfield excels in one major area, and that's the sights.
Q-Ball7@reddit
Apart from everything that has, but you just haven't really heard about them because rifle technology has moved on to automatics (and for a long time, accurized WW2 surplus was used in lieu of developing something better).
For instance, the Mauser 66- very obviously not a K98; it would go on to be the basis for a few rather interesting precision rifles.
So would the Sauer 80/Carl Gustaf 3000/SSG2000, which are flapper-locked designs, used in the same niches. (And then there's the Heym SR30 design, which is an evolution of this concept using rollers.)
BloodRush12345@reddit
Nothing I have ever really heard of. There is a reason so many countries adopted Mausers and mauser actions are quite popular on the commercial market.
Kumirkohr@reddit
I wonder how much if that is to do with the design and how much of it has to do with Germany not having state arsenals like the other major powers
Q-Ball7@reddit
There was nothing else to buy, and nobody else to buy from.
If it's 1900, and you're some middling power with limited industry and design capacity, then the only real option you have for a modern military rifle is the Germans, who will sell you all the 98s you could possibly want and/or license the design to you.
Yes, the 98 is a competent rifle, but it wouldn't really have mattered because there was very little viable competition. Same thing would happen with Belgium in the '50s with the FAL, by the way.
BloodRush12345@reddit
Quality robust design. They are admittedly a bit harder/expensive to manufacture. But the action is very strong as evidenced by the insane number of calibers including high power stuff it has been chambered in.
I don't know how many countries/companies paid licensing to Mauser or just copied it anyway, but I suspect it wouldn't have been any less popular if they did have a state arsenal.
No_Dress_2107@reddit (OP)
Thank you
Navy87Guy@reddit
As a shooter, there are no significant issues with the K98k, other than the limited magazine capacity (which was standard for the time). “Cock on open” seems superior to “Cock on close”.
Popular_Mushroom_349@reddit
I think the German mausers should have had a standard side rail for a scope. It helps the factories hand-fit the sniper models easier. And the GIs bringing them home didn't have to mess with anything ("sporterize").
Dry_Winter5652@reddit
The Germans were the only ones doing scope rails as standard at the time, and that wasnt until late in the war. And G.I's would have sporterized it no matter what. It wasnt too long ago there was a guy on the milsurp forum with a sporterized type 99 sniper rifle. It wouldnt have mattered if it had scope rails or not, it would have been sporterized. And it would only add cost and time to a rifle that already was expensive and took a significant amount of time to produce.
Popular_Mushroom_349@reddit
It's just a casual discussion. Lighten up
CanadianLanBoy@reddit
It's sights are pretty bad compared to almost anything else, and they were bedded poorly and weren't very accurate (though still certainly good enough for government work)
The action itself is excellent, but the overall gun is pretty lackluster. Export models and some produced under license abroad were generally better rifles overall. The HeeresWaffenamt kinda shot these guns in the foot, I'm sure if you let Mauser cook they could have produced a much better overall rifle
pinesolthrowaway@reddit
The main issue I have with it is that the sights are absolute dog shit, virtually every other mainstream bolt action of the war did better in that regard
If you have an earlier one with no sight hood, the front sight blade is so fine it gets lost extremely easily in any kind of sunlight, and even if you have one with a sight hood, the v notch in the rear sight leaf is so tiny it’s going to take a soldier far too long to get any kind of accurate sight picture to do any kind of reasonably accurate shooting. Good luck getting accurate shots off in any kind of reasonable time if you have anything worse than practically 20/10 vision
I mean, ffs 91/30s have far more usable sights than K98s do, that’s how bad the sight design is
Consistent-Coyote-50@reddit
Heavy bolt? Low capacity?
No_Dress_2107@reddit (OP)
Almost every ww2 bolt rifle had a 5 round capacity, so did this one. Its not even low.
Consistent-Coyote-50@reddit
Carcano have 6, K31 have 6, Lee Enfield 10
Dry_Winter5652@reddit
Magazine capacity in a bolt action is not as important i think as people make it out to be. Yes, at he start of any engagement you have more ammo. But 1 rd isnt significant, and the lee enfield has 5 more rounds at the start of the engagement but also takes more than twice as long to fully reload. It a trade off.
Chumlee1917@reddit
trying to find 8mm mauser in 2026
DerKrieger105@reddit
It is readily available youre just going to be paying $.70-$1 a round though
FlyingYankee118@reddit
It’s actually some of the cheaper milsurp ammo available right now
Cheap-Material-5518@reddit
The sights are not as easy to use compared ro other rifles of the period. The action itself is fairly strong though.
Amarathe_@reddit
Other than cost its a very fine rifle. Personally i like how the arisaka magazine follower blocks the bolt to let you know its empty. The arisaka also had a monopod and anti aircraft sights. Not sure how good either of those are as ive never shot an aircraft and my arisaka doesnt have its monopod sadly. Historically those are features the japanese decided werent important as the war went on and demand for rifles outpaced production.
Production capacity was also an important factor and the quality of the k98k was a problem later in the war. In the final days they simplified the k98 into a simple, ugly but functional rifle.
Cliffinati@reddit
The K98 follower blocks the bolt when empty.
To close the bolt on an empty mag K98 you have to press the follower in until the bolt is on top of it
Nesayas1234@reddit
The K98k has a follower that blocks the bolt (as did the Gewehr 98). Some other Mauser 98s like the FN and I think Vz. series did not, but for sure the German ones do.
ManOf1000Usernames@reddit
It is almost the final evolution of the Mauser rifle, all the kinks had been worked out even by the original 1898, let alone the later 98K refurbishments which further modernized it.
It is more coveted in the US due to it's WW2 associated notoriety, thus regularly fetching a higher price compared to the litany of other similar mausers. Plus, 8mm mauser is not exactly common in the US, much of which you can get is corrosive old surplus. Many were heavily bubbaed as well as cheap hunting rifles, or converted to other calibers, in the decades since the war.
No_Dragonfruit8254@reddit
Even the corrosive old surplus is pretty good. Turkish loads are hot but a lot of the other ammo is very consistent/reliable and cleaning your gun every range trip isn’t a significant cost.
Nesayas1234@reddit
Generally no. You can argue other similar rifles did it better depending on what you prefer (straight bolt handle, longer handguard, no follower hold-open, etc etc) but overall it's only real issue is being a 5-shot, bolt-action rifle chambered in 8mm Mauser. Kind of overkill for most soldiers in most combat scenarios.
Repulsive_Music_6720@reddit
Even then it's role in doctrine is as essentially a support weapon for machine gun teams. Interchangeability of ammunition with the squad mg, and ability to be made by known processes means it fits great into its role despite isolated downsides.
Nesayas1234@reddit
True there. Frankly if you were going to be stuck with a full power rifle round, 8mm Mauser isn't a bad pick.
Ritterbruder2@reddit
Mechanically, it’s a sound rifle. It’s heavily overbuilt and very conservative from a safety and reliability standpoint.
I dislike the flat butt plate that is super slippery in the shoulder. It really needs a curvature. Also, the 8mm Mauser cartridge is overpowered and kicks too hard. There are accounts of German soldiers not able to shoot more than 20-30 rounds in one sitting.
leto78@reddit
The Remington 700 action is better than the Kar98K but they share many features, because at the end of the day, the Remington is a variant of the Mauser 98.
Artistic_Regard_QED@reddit
Expensive and kinda hard to make.
otherwise an excellent rifle.
ObjectVegetable3874@reddit
Downsides of the Kar98k from a user perspective are relatively fine sights, harsh recoil, a slippery buttpad and a slowish to operate bolt. I'd prefer No4, M1917, P14 or Mas 36 over it.
AutoModerator@reddit
Understand the rules
Check the sidebar. It's full of resources to help you.
Not everyone is an expert such as yourself; be considerate.
No Spam. No Memes.
No political posts. Save that for /r/progun or /r/politics.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.