Getting this as a replacement barrel for a really cheap price. However I am not fluent in the language of barrel codes. It devoid of other markings than this one. Thanks for any insight.
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...untitled-1.jpg
Printable View
Getting this as a replacement barrel for a really cheap price. However I am not fluent in the language of barrel codes. It devoid of other markings than this one. Thanks for any insight.
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...untitled-1.jpg
The "49" is : theGerman WW-II Heerswaffenamt inspector's mark on assigned to Erma Werke, Erfurt, Germany. Don't know much else.
According to Backbone of the Wehrmacht by Richard Law, on page 83, "DO" is one of the many unknown barrel maker codes and as the barrels are often subcontracted out, the inspector proofs can't really tell us much... Such is the life for the mauser collector
Ah well win some, loose some. May still work for what I'm after. I have one of the SS contract receivers that at some point in the past somebody put an israeli barrel on. If was a israelie done conversion I'd leave it, But alas all that I have spoken to and have seen it say it aint so. While I know that it still wont be original it'll be closer to it.
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...101_2280-1.jpg
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...101_2279-1.jpg
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...101_2276-1.jpg
if it's an Israeli barrel, you should check that it's still in original 7.92x57mm caliber and wasn't reworked to be 7.62x51mm
The one on it currently is 7.62 nato. I'm putting on a 7.92 barrel. Sorry for the lack of clarification on that.
That bbl is off of a 337 code 1939 rifle. That is the only time that WaA proof shows up on K98k rifles. However, if there is no ser nrs on the bbl it may well be a replacemet bbl sent to some rebuild facility.
I would also question that being an SS contrakt receiver.
Sarge
BNZ is Steyr Daimler Puch which was staffed largely out of local area concentration camps. Similar to this is BCD, the Gustloff Werks which was built at Buchenwald and operated there until the British bombed it in April of 1944. In reality, the later the war got on, the more and more parts that are subject to being 'SS' contracts. In reality, they aren't so much contracts but more appropriately, they are parts made under SS supervision which more often than not translates into weapons made at labour camps. Rifles made at BNZ are therefore likely to have been built by slave labour but that DOES NOT mean they are SS rifles. One must remember that as much as they tried, they could not manufacture enough to completely supplement their forces. As a general rule, unless otherwise noted, rifle without any SS issue markings are not considered to be SS rifles per se. For example, on the inside of my buttplate on the stock of my DOT 1944, are SS runes and a rack or supply number. Does that mean this rifle was SS issued? Probably not, but it does tell me that it is possible and indeed likely that atleast the buttstock may have come out the labour system which was often farmed out to create individual components for rifles and the like.
Mauthausen to be exactQuote:
BNZ is Steyr Daimler Puch which was staffed largely out of local area concentration camps.
true, but this is not really the case with the large font "bnz 44" rifles. if they have no letter suffix on the serial number, they are widely considered to have been from the first 10,000 of 1944 and the last of SS contract riflesQuote:
As a general rule, unless otherwise noted, rifle without any SS issue markings are not considered to be SS rifles per se.
Oh so much to learn. Bsides the obvious whats the difference with the font size?
large font bnz rifles were actually made by Steyr Daimler Puch in Austria. small fonts were made at Radom in Poland for Steyr