MG08 front jacket armor original

[MrMilo]

I was hoping someone could tell from the pics if the front armor on my 08 was original or a repro.

[IMBLITZVT]

Fair chance its original. It has the front sight screw cut, looks to fit on tight around the front sight. Is there a gap between the plate and the jacket? Any markings?

[MrMilo]

When I get home this evening I will check for any markings. I am guessing the green paint on the jacket is postwar applied?

[IMBLITZVT]

I would say its not original paint.

That plate almost look brass in the picture. I assume its not.

[mg34nz]

How can you tell an original from repro? Is it the notch for the adjustment screw? or did some have this and others did not? I was looking at some frontal armor recently and there were four or five examples and none of them had the slot.Only one was detached from the gun and it had numerical marking on the reverse. Sorry no pics of them as photography was forbidden.
How good is the IMA repro water jacket armor?? Does any sort of fake spotting tutorial exist? Not that I imagine I will find or afford an original set I just dont want to be screwed buying a repro set as original !

Thanks

Andrew

[IMBLITZVT]

A lot of the repros are missing the front sight adjustment screw notch. This is easy to add. I am not saying no originals were without notch but most of the repros are missing them. A single number stamped in the back is typical of IMA repro armor with no notch. You really want to see a markers mark stamped in the back. However I think some were just not marked. I have Sled armor like that that I am pretty sure is original. Quality and fit tell the most. IMA and other repros just don't fit perfectly. It is getting to the point on a lot of this that its no longer possible to tell repro from original. I would not pay big money for any armor without markers marks stamped in the back. Just no real way to tell IMHO.

[bmg17a1]

Pic of orignal MG08 jacket front armor. Note how the relief for the front sight screw is done on this one. The thickness of the metal is about .225" thick, a bit short of 1/4". The backside where the 'S' bend is at the bottom is interesting since the backface of the lower lip appears to be forged.
Markings are not deciphered.

I have another half dozen of these that are all different with a couple without any markings evident; one with a three digit number and a hieroglyphic or maybe four digits; and a couple that appear to be interwar with two digit stamped numbers and much thinner, about .165".
Over the years,I have never come across one of these made in anything but steel, and given the function, brass would not be appropriate. In my opinion, the thick metal types will most likely be original unless obviously repro. The repro front armor is much thinner and would not really be up to protecting the jacket cap if hit by AP.
New made jacket armor is easy to tell since it looks new made. The nuts appear to be hardware store items, as are washers if included, both being cad plated or the equivalent; the techniques used to make them are die stampings, etc. The metal surface is unoxidized and thinner than the vintage examples.

Bob Naess

[bmg17a1]

Another MG08 front jacket armor. Small stamped number on backside and an odd circle of very small uniform hash marks that looks like abrasion from something and not a deliberate application. Metal is about .230" thick, which is even closer to 1/4" than the example above. There is no doubt that it is original.
MG08-3 nose armor-0.JPG[/attachment]

Bob Naess

[MarkFinneran]

Just to add to the confusion. I have one with a square slight indent to the front and the other has the same markings as Bob's. Perhaps David/Fritz know something of the maker or inspector stamps?

[bmg17a1]

The circular mark on your armor, Mark, is more legible than the one on mine, so thanks for the pic. The letter is different, though, so one might assume that the circular mark is the maker's logo.
The square stamping footprint appears to make the bend for the sight bracket. What is the thickness of the metal?

Bob Naess

[mg34nz]

Here is one that I just added to the collection No makers mark evident and no sight screw slot and the hole for the sight is not a close fit around the MG08 sight, the hole is 25mm wide and 20mm deep, the plate is around 5.5mm thick but this varies depending where its measured from, looks to have been stamped out and the folded bottom edge almost looks like it was hammer forged ? It has a nice ring to it when tapped with a finger nail unlike the dull thud that comes from mild steel indicating that the steel is high quality if not "armor plate".
Paint looks to be original and it certainly appears to be a good period original but your opinions would be appreciated!

Andrew

[MarkFinneran]

I have almost given up hope on correctly identifying armour - just so many different orignals and good fakes. Another unknown maker? Any ideas please?