From the looks of you're S'G', it seems possible that the Inland parts are original and the type II rear sight added in the field later on in WWII. Very nice find! :thup:
Printable View
From the looks of you're S'G', it seems possible that the Inland parts are original and the type II rear sight added in the field later on in WWII. Very nice find! :thup:
SUPER Nice find! :super:
I've been checking a lot of these older S'G' threads because I've recently added a couple more of them to my own collection. In looking at this post I see a lot of similar parts on this gun compared to one of mine from the IP - S'G' block. I think the marking on the bolt lug shown is S'G' rather than SG - right? And what's the deal on that second picture of the rear sight? It seems to be floating behind the dove tail - is this "photo shopped," or am I missing something? Also I see that pesky "Z" front sight showing up again - maybe it's correct for the S'G' - SG block, but not for IP - S'G'? Were they producing both s/n blocks at the same time, or was the gun in this thread assembled in early '44 and just happened to get a 9-43 marked barrel? Just can't figure all this out! Thanks - Bob
The bolt is marked S'G'. Nothing photo shopped on the pics, rear sight is normal and staked to the reciever with one punch mark. I dont know enough about the IP/S'G'/SG saga to comment on any of your other questions.
If I recall correctly the N or Z (same company ) was used throughout IP/S'G' production.
It showed up more in the later IP/S'G' guns more than earlier, but you will find IP marked guns late into the fall of '43.
You must understand how Grand Rapids used the SN's to understand how the above could happen, but it did.
Dave
Here's a comparison of the rear sights on my S'G' and mpd1978's. It's obvious that my "mixmaster" has a Type 2 sight and his has a Type 3, but why does his receiver sight base appear to be ahead of the sight? What is that, a shadow or something? That's why I asked if the picture was photoshopped. Thanks, Bob.
Attachment 18734Attachment 18735
The difference is in the way the milled and stamped sights were built. The dovetail on the milled is at the very front and the stamped is more in the center. If you look at some loose sights side by side you can easily see what I am talking about. The milled sight is just shorter in length than the stamped.
Dave
Not sure what you mean. His receiver looks correct to me. The arrow points to the proof firing puch mark on the receiver bridge, otherwise the rear sight hump is arcing down to the bolt slot correctly.
Dave
It's an optical Illustion, go back and forth on the pic's. The dried cosmoline makes it appear as a sight base.