I have an APOLOGY to make to you guys, I finally got that picture to come up and that is a M-97 for sure. After further investigation, I was able to find the source at IW. I had seen the thumbnail pic of the whole rifle before and never gave it a second thought (OR LOOK). I took it hook-line and sinker
that it was as described. I had seen that picture over a year ago at a couple different places with the description. I knew it wasn't the old G-Series Roger Raglin Signature rifle with the White/Lyman peep sight and the Bell & Carlson stock, cause I nearly bought one of those back in '94 or '95.
I am VERY SORRY for this mis-information on my part, but want you to know I was not trying to deceive you. I am not so sure the person selling it isn't trying to deceive the prospective buyers though. I took the thumbnails and ran them through my Photo Studio and enhanced them. Sure enough it is a M-97 (100%), just like you guys had said. That will be the last time I take a description as being truthful, even though this guy claims it is a M-98 and it clearly is not.
Some features that stand out that verify that it is a 97 are: the receiver is smaller on a 97 (close to barrel diameter), the striker is shorter and larger diameter on the 97, the striker is directly over the front of the trigger guard on a 97 (after enhancing the larger picture it can clearly be seen), on a M-98 the front of the trigger guard is 1.5" behind the rear of the opening in the receiver for the striker, the stock is thicker on a 97 and the wrist and comb are shaped differenty, there is only one ramrod thimble on the rifle in the picture and a M-98 has two.
SORRY GUYS, but I took this guy for his word.
Buyer beware on this one! I think there is a reason there is only thumbnail pics and strategically placed ones at that.
Just goes to show when you think you might know something, you really don't.
Guess I better go back to lurking, instead of putting my foot in my mouth.