Page 1 of 2

FNG question - Which is the best way to go on an MG42 receiv

Posted: Mon Oct 22, 2007 6:01 pm
by H_Waffenfabrik
There's a kit available through APEX but it only includes the 'middle section' of the receiver. Is it easier to find the other portions to complete it, buy another demilled receiver, or go with an 80% from Coldsteel ???

I'm in the parts gathering mode right now in the beginning stages of planning a semi re-build. Thanks, I'm just a FNG here.

:)

Re: FNG question - Which is the best way to go on an MG42 receiv

Posted: Mon Oct 22, 2007 6:59 pm
by propos
It all depends on how deep your pockets are. Wiselite has a receiver as does Coldsteel. From what I gather from reading the posts on the 2, the Wiselite receiver is superior to the Coldsteel. However there is a substantial price difference. Or you could find the missing receiver sections and weld them together.

Re: FNG question - Which is the best way to go on an MG42 receiv

Posted: Mon Oct 22, 2007 7:32 pm
by H_Waffenfabrik
propos wrote:It all depends on how deep your pockets are. Wiselite has a receiver as does Coldsteel. From what I gather from reading the posts on the 2, the Wiselite receiver is superior to the Coldsteel. However there is a substantial price difference. Or you could find the missing receiver sections and weld them together.
Well, I'm looking for the most economical. However, if Wiselite has a 100% receiver then it might be worth the extra $$$ to save some worktime. Where would I look for the 'missing' receiver sections or would they be too difficult to locate ? It seems all imported WWII parts are getting scarce or expensive.

Re: FNG question - Which is the best way to go on an MG42 receiv

Posted: Mon Oct 22, 2007 8:20 pm
by bolex
Check gunbroker.com. I have seen parts there in the past.

My guess that by the middle you mean the barrel shroud. This means the two choices that I know of as stated before are the Wiselite and Coldsteel. The Wiselite is a limited release from my understanding so if you want one of those you had better get it. The Wiselite is also an FFL receiver so you will need your FFL to get it. Check the F/S in this forum. The Coldsteel is less polished and is categorized as a "piece of steel". The third option is a German 3 or 4 cut receiver that must be welded together. I built a coldsteel and it can be done if you have the skills and tools. This was not a dremel tool build (but you still need one!). Welding is needed any way you go, just easier with the Wiselite and Coldsteel (you are not filling in the 1/4" torch cuts of the 3/4 pcs German receivers).

My 2 cents.

Re: FNG question - Which is the best way to go on an MG42 receiv

Posted: Tue Oct 23, 2007 8:55 am
by Pirate
Personally I think the Wise Lite receiver is the best choice, and in the end the most ecnomical and the best investment.

With the Wise Lite receiver you will wind up with a legal, registered semi auto built to a BATF approved design. The receivers are built to spec with attentions paid to detail and close tolerences. The CS receivers are basically a crap shoot and may or may not work, they are a lot cheaper, but if it doesn't work it is $$$$$ and time wasted.

At this point in time the 42 is an expensive build, expect to spend close to $2,000.00 for a finished gun. and a lot of hours building and tweaking it into life.

Re: FNG question - Which is the best way to go on an MG42 receiv

Posted: Sat Oct 27, 2007 2:13 pm
by reb62
I just recently purchased one of the APEX 42 kits in 8mm for $350 including shipping. I got it for the parts to finish a 3 cut receiver I am working on for a M53 SA build. I must say that I was expecting to discard the receiver section that came with this kit, but upon receiving it I found that I got a nice German bpr receiver section with AA sight mount included. Of course I needed the AA sight for my 53 3 cut, but again I may just keep this receiver and build off of it as well in another SA build.

The booster cut was clean and vertically straight through the first ring ahead of the front sight, all you would need is a replacement booster. The cam section was cut clean behind the cam section so another receiver section would be easily cut for replacement. All in all I thought is was a good buy while they last.

The rest of the kit was in good condition though the butt stock (M53 wire wrap) was in ratty condition, no big deal. I'll replace it anyway with a nice repro.

I'll post pics of the receiver section Sun or Mon evening when I get back in town.

Re: FNG question - Which is the best way to go on an MG42 receiv

Posted: Sat Oct 27, 2007 7:14 pm
by bolex
Pirate wrote:... The CS receivers are basically a crap shoot and may or may not work, they are a lot cheaper, but if it doesn't work it is $$$$$ and time wasted.

At this point in time the 42 is an expensive build, expect to spend close to $2,000.00 for a finished gun. and a lot of hours building and tweaking it into life.
I disagree with some of the statements.
The CS receiver may not work? Why? It is a 80% receiver so by the accepted definition machining is required. As long as there is material to work with it should work, and even then welding would add missing material. I would place the position of the CS receiver as easier than a pile of steel and a scratch built receiver and a lot, lot harder than the Wiselite. But it would always be able to made to work.

Cost for materials:
Coldsteel Receiver $350
Parts kit MGS $350
Barrel Bushing $105
Buffer cams $15
Bolt rework $140
Firing pin $30
Feed Stud $25
Aluminum grip $160
AR FCG $80
Ratchet plate $35
Rivets, hardware, etc $25
Which if I did my math right = $1,315 and that is with the semi auto parts completed for you. I got these costs off this forum and supplier web sites this evening. Now if I missed something, and I am sure it will be pointed out, but it wouldn't be $585. Now if you are including the cost of having the work done for you, this is not the least cost to build one.
And of course additional cost for ammo and belts.

I agree with the hours statement to build, however I may have been the exception to the rule in that the only tweaking to bring it to life was to change out the AR hammer spring to a stronger one (yugo ammo) and I had ordered it prior to going shooting based on the comments about yugo ammo here. If you are a careful builder, and read up on everything in this forum it shouldn't be problem to build one right.

Re: FNG question - Which is the best way to go on an MG42 receiv

Posted: Sun Oct 28, 2007 11:06 am
by Abominog
Yes, but how the hell you going to weld it together? That will take either a jig or having it done outside. Then there's the incidentals- the missing parts to be replaced, links, new prings, J Baums manuals, etc. You can build a Cobra replica for $15k too- yeah, right. The reality is that by the time you're done, you're going to be $2k into the project unless you're a master gunsmith. And the less you know, the more it will cost. $2k plus is a good estimate to build one, so nobody is surprised.

Re: FNG question - Which is the best way to go on an MG42 receiv

Posted: Sun Oct 28, 2007 11:59 am
by bolex
Abominog wrote:Yes, but how the hell you going to weld it together? That will take either a jig or having it done outside. Then there's the incidentals- the missing parts to be replaced, links, new prings, J Baums manuals, etc. You can build a Cobra replica for $15k too- yeah, right. The reality is that by the time you're done, you're going to be $2k into the project unless you're a master gunsmith. And the less you know, the more it will cost. $2k plus is a good estimate to build one, so nobody is surprised.
Well I did it for less than $1,000 during May, June and July this year, and I am not a master gunsmith or trained machinist. I bought the HF TIG welder $150 (sale and coupon) and learned to weld with TIG myself. I generally do not consider tools in the cost if they are able to be used for other things. I also own a buss box, mig and torches (and no formal training on any of them). Fixturing is not required like the 3 cut receivers. I did make a fixture using a ground steel bar (about $6) which made rails alignment with the barrel easier. The only information I used came off the internet and mainly from here, no manuals. This is all documented in this topic viewtopic.php?f=10&t=5147&start=105&st=0&sk=t&sd=a. I didn't shoot it after I got it assembled because I was waiting on one of the new short springs being made (still waiting), after a month I gave up and cut my recoil spring, installed it and went shooting.

Re: FNG question - Which is the best way to go on an MG42 receiv

Posted: Sun Oct 28, 2007 3:46 pm
by Bil
Bolex-subtract the cost of rail rivets-I still have some to give away! Some of the build has got to be because you like doing it.It can be done for what you have,but will probabaly be closer to the 2 grand,or somewhere in between.If all you want is to shoot the gun,save your time and get the Century one.If you value your labor time at all,this has got to be the cheapest way.[I still enjoyed building my own,and coming here for the info has been half of the fun] ---bil

Re: FNG question - Which is the best way to go on an MG42 receiv

Posted: Sun Oct 28, 2007 4:15 pm
by bolex
Bil wrote:...If all you want is to shoot the gun,save your time and get the Century one.If you value your labor time at all,this has got to be the cheapest way.[I still enjoyed building my own,and coming here for the info has been half of the fun] ---bil
Total agreement, you couldn't beat the price Century is selling them for. However, for me the enjoyment is in the challenge of taking the parts and making something work again. As you stated I like doing it, spread the work over 3 months so it was still fun.

Re: FNG question - Which is the best way to go on an MG42 receiv

Posted: Mon Oct 29, 2007 1:13 am
by reb62
Greetings all,

As promised, here are some pics of the APEX receiver section that came with the $350 kit.

Re: FNG question - Which is the best way to go on an MG42 receiv

Posted: Mon Oct 29, 2007 7:49 am
by Bil
Very nice! Score! That should be a fairly easy fix,as the entire cam section is there.That is the part that is where all the measuring comes from.The nose looks good too,just add a wise-lite piece.I have seen several of these front cuts with that long 'icicle'left on,I wonder why.Good luck with the build. ---bil

Re: FNG question - Which is the best way to go on an MG42 receiv

Posted: Fri Nov 02, 2007 4:41 pm
by drooling idiot
If you replace the front bearing, and clean up the rear torch slag nice and square .
I've seen that exact section sell REAL fast @ $400. good score on the parts kit.

Re: FNG question - Which is the best way to go on an MG42 receiv

Posted: Fri Nov 02, 2007 6:01 pm
by FN74
One of my kits looks just like yours reb!

Re: FNG question - Which is the best way to go on an MG42 receiv

Posted: Tue Nov 06, 2007 3:50 pm
by Gorbachov
I just posted this reply in the post "Where are the kits?" and found this thread, which covers some of the same issues so I'm posting the reply in here as well.

I may be dead wrong, but when I did the math on buying a $200 parts kit, along with buying all the necessary receiver components from someone like Wise Lite Arms and or Burnt Capital, it made more sense to spend the extra money and buy a 4-cut German MG42 parts kit. You’re going to end up spending the money anyway no mater how you look at it. With a German 4-cut kit it’s all there and you don’t need to go running around trying to figure out what you need and piece milling it all together from various different sources. There’s also a lot less fabricating. If you look at Florida Gun Work’s parts kit for $799.95 (See http://www.floridagunworks.com/Merchant ... +PARTSKITS) that’s probably a bargain. I paid $200 for my M53 from Sarco about 6-9 months back and after researching what all I needed to build the kit, I ended up buying a 4-cut German receiver from Tom Kirksey (aka Cpt_Kirks) for $1,000 and I’m no where near done spending money in order to complete the gun. Somebody please correct me if I’m wrong on all this!

Re: FNG question - Which is the best way to go on an MG42 receiv

Posted: Tue Nov 06, 2007 4:51 pm
by Bil
You aren't-see my response to your other post. ---bil

Re: FNG question - Which is the best way to go on an MG42 receiv

Posted: Tue Nov 06, 2007 5:58 pm
by railsplitter
Another voice weighing in - Cold Steel is cheap but you get what you pay for - its crude compared to most 80% receivers. I found a nice demill that was uncut from the barrel bearing back to the rear side of the camming section. Wiselite or BRP parts should complete it but its on the back burner after a long long wait and a 80% that needs more work than expected. :(

Re: FNG question - Which is the best way to go on an MG42 receiv

Posted: Tue Nov 06, 2007 6:35 pm
by Gorbachov
Thanks Bill:

I guess the advantage of going the cheaper kit route is if you want to extend the cost of the build out over a period of time in order to pay for it in a manner that’s not going to take a heavy bite out of your monthly cash flow; then maybe the way to do it is the pay as you go method by piece milling it. I was fortunate to have received an inheritance from my dad’s estate shortly after buying my Sarco kit, or I probably wouldn’t have been able to afford Tom’s receiver, plus he was extremely patient with me. My financial situation has improved considerably since then and I’m now thinking about buying another 3 or 4 cut German kit. I’d prefer to have an all German gun in my collection and the one I have now is a combination M53/MG42. If I do purchase another one I’ll keep the 1st one for spare parts, or maybe display the two of them on a double gun mount like the ones RTG is selling.

Gorbachov

Re: FNG question - Which is the best way to go on an MG42 receiv

Posted: Thu Nov 08, 2007 11:48 am
by railsplitter
I checked out the wiselite piece on Weaponeer Looks good - has anyone done a SA build on this FFL section? Are the bends, cuts and predrills accurate such that it all goes together without alot of fuss (additional bending, cutting than would be expedcted)? Obviously it needs to be welded to the front half. Will a buffer fit as it should without further machining, do the rails align correctly, etc? looks hopefull :?