MG42 in .223

[JBaum]

The .223 conversion kit consists of:

-bolt head, with smaller diameter recess in the face to fit the .223 shell, modified extractor, etc.
-feed tray, with spacer for the shorter cartridge (we've all seen these before for the .308)
-top cover with modified feed pawl assy. to work with the smaller diameter cartridge,
maybe a shape modification on the pressure plate
-barrel bushing with smaller hole
-nozzle with smaller hole
-and barrel for .223

I don't think it would really be that big of a deal to put some of these kits together, other than the bolt head. Guys are already making barrels using the old extensions, so that's not a problem to get some made in .223. The recess in the bolt head could be filled in and remachined, but the extractor would be a pain (hardening, etc.), and the ejector rod placement needs realigned to the smaller diameter shell, or maybe go with a bigger diameter hole and use a larger ejector rod. Feed pawls may need a new lever ratio to get them to move the proper distance for .223 in links. Getting smaller holes in the barrel bushing and nozzle would just be a matter of welding and redrilling/shaping.

Actually, everything would be legal to import except the barrels, and they can be made here. I'm in for one if anyone has any ideas.

Pictures below are from the Italian conversion kit.

[Bil]

What about the belts? I was going to check the fit,but found out my son had 'borrowed' the AR while I was away."Honest,Dad,there is no way we shot that much ammo!' ---bil

[JBaum]

"What about the belts"? what about them? If it's converted to .223, you use .223 links instead of .308 links as the MG3 uses (disintegrating links, like the M60, not the MG34/42 style belts).

I don't understand your question.

My kids have their own ammo. No, they can't "borrow" (take) mine.

[Bil]

I am not up on any other equipment,I was thinking of the 34/42 belts. When I was a kid,the use of belts was not verboten,so I never even thought of 'borrowing' my fathers ammo. I don't mind,I have the keys to his Beemer. [My kids] ---bil

[MauserMatt]

I want one!!!!

Though there won't be the big BOOM of 8mm... It would be cool to have..

Where do we start?

[Blanksguy]

To help keep this topic alive......

1: What about welding over not only the front-recess for the cartridge (to be re-milled to 5.56mm/.223)......but could the extractor area be welded over and re-milled for a different extractor such as the M16/AR15 extractor spring and pin (?).

2: If the extractor area is too thin near the firing-pin hole......could a new extractor be drawn up (blue-print) and then machined (and heat-treated) on a group-buy issue (?). I hate to use the word "Group-Buy".....then the "other-board"..."W____" jumps on it to make their profit and I believe that t would be better to have one of our members design/make/sell the set-up to fire 5.56mm/.223 in the MG42/SA42 for us......correct (?).

3: Do we have someone on board that has access to the company that can chrome-line the bore and chamber (?). I had talked to a company a few years ago about doing a run of Stoner-63A short-barrels......I was told at that time that they could make the barrels...."but" they would not have chrome-line barrels and chambers like the other M16-series/AR15 that they were making. It can be chrome-line/plated for the chambers.....which should be a requirement for the person/company making them.

4: Recoil springs can be made by a company that I know that does short runs of "prototype" springs.......but the company that I know will not make them from "braided-wire" like the MG42 recoil-spring.

5: Belts (?).....It should be designed to use the M249-SAW links that are current military/surplus.

6: As an earlier reply talked about....maybe the intire conversion-kits could be "imported" from Italy (or whereever they were made or sold to)......into the USA minus barrel.....or with the barrel "DEMILed" so that we would have the extensions and "profile" to make new barrels (?).

Last....guys that want a conversion-kit in caliber 7.62x39mm.........just keep the thread alive and base your design on this conversion-kit.

Keep the ideas coming.
Regards, RichardS in MI.
Blanksguy2001@chartermi.net

[TactAdv]

"What ever happened to the information/"Articles" from the "old-MG42-Board......?
I am looking for the article of the caliber conversion to 5.56mm/.223 Rem. firing from an MG42 (not the Spanish copy in the Armeni-(?-spelling)...but a conversion-kit that allowed use of 5.56mmNATO/.223 Rem. in an MG42/M53/MG3 ..... where did all of this good information go (?)."

The 5,56mm NATO caliber conversion is made and marketed by Luigi-Franchi SPA, in Italy. The kit is still available for sale, however there has always been a highly restrictive company internal directive that prohibits its sale to other than the military agencies of countries that were involved in the MG42/59 cooperative production program. No amount of money will get you one directly, believe me people with more money than God have tried, even before the current (temporary) barrel import ban.

Only a very few examples of this kit have escaped this situation, sold after delivery to one of those member countries. I know of exactly two in the USA. They reside with two of the three owners of the only original fully transferable MG42/59 guns here in the USA. These guns came out of the Colt working reference collection, and were part of larger deal to settle an outstanding debt against Colt. I am sure a few of you might know where that puts them. 2 of the 4 total guns Colt imported were sold to close associates of the individual who got the original four from Colt. 2 of those 3 owners wound up with one each of the Franchi 5,56mm conversion kits. The kits do not include any downsized parts, all parts are "full size" but adapted for the smaller cartridge. There are at least two, possibly three, additional kits I know of in private hands, two in Switzerland, one possibly still in Finland.

The kits are still for sale, though reportedly there were never very many sales even when in production. I doubt actual parts have been manufactured since the late 70's. The kits I know of bear dates in the late 60's. Supposedly the conversions run flawlessly with M193 ammunitions.

-TomH

[hcpookie]

This is a good idea for a "plinking" conversion because of the stupid low supply of ammo right now...


Spitballing here...


Seems like you could buy a spare top cover and adapt it to use FN Minimi (SAW) feed pawls. Spacing for the smaller size cartridge is obviously needed but the same principle works.

And while you're at it, the 5.56 SAW links would probably work, just like with an MG3.

Since the barrel shoulders are available, it would be doable to take a .223 barrel blank and lathe it to the right size. You may even be able to use the original barrel stub that comes with the shoulders to sleeve a .223 barrel (less work maybe?).

The only "tweak" part I see is the spring pressure. Getting the *right* springs would be the only head-scratching part IMO.

[dwmmg08]

.223 is a thought, but I like the 7.62 x 39 idea better. I think it would be easier to do, or at least easier to make work? The conversion could use the (I think) RPK belts?) I'm going to sit down and think on this for a while, as it seems like this should work...

[dwmmg08]

Sorry, My Bad: I'm thinking of the 50 rd. RPD belts, RPK uses drums and mags. Again, I don't see where a conversion to the M43 cartridge wouldn't work great, but I'm thinking of the MG34, too- it seems like it should have a bit more recoil energy to work the action, as well.

Glen

[Pirate]

seems like the 7.62 x 39 would be the best one to try. ammo is cheap, belts are available. and the feed section could be scaled from an rpd.

[bolex]

What ever happened to the 7.62x54R conversion?

[dwmmg08]

Does anyone know if the RPD strips its rounds out of the belt the same way as an MG34 does? If so, that's great, if not, that could be a problem.

I just checked the bolt head, it should work, perhaps no mods needed. All you may need is a modified feed tray, belts, and a new barrel?

I thought of 7.62x54, it would be awesome to do that, but I think the action of the MG34 pretty much strikes out converting it to that-- the rounds have to strip off the belt forward, Im not sure what belt would work for that with the rimmed cartridge . It works (well) in Maxims, but I'm not sure it could be made to work in the MG34- I think you pretty well need a rimless type cartridge. Be interesting to try, though!

Glen

[Blanksguy]

The RPD (in 7.62x39mm) strips the round as the MG34/MG42 does......"but"...
the RPD belts come in two "types":

First/earlier type RPD-Belts are similar to a scaled down version of the MG34/MG42 steel belt that have a "nib" that catches in the extractor-groove of the cartridge on each link.......these can be hand-loaded.

The second/later type have an "L" projection at the rear of each link and requires that the cartridges be loaded into the belt by pushing them down until they clip into the belt "but" in front of the "L" that must be located behind the base of each caartridge......or the use of an East-German Z-64 (can't recall the nomenclature) belt-loader.

Regards, RichardS in MI.
Blanksguy2001@chartermi.net
Proud owner of a C&R Chinese Model 56-1 (Fifth-version RPD).

[sdk1968]

mines not even built yet and im already looking at conversions/????

the cheap stuff right now is that 5.45x39.... could you just go tht way?

[JBaum]

Have you seen a 5.45 x 39 cartridge? I've seen cap guns with more power. The cartridge would be too weak to unlock the bolt and feed the belt.

[Pirate]

Have you seen a 5.45 x 39 cartridge? I've seen cap guns with more power. The cartridge would be too weak to unlock the bolt and feed the belt.

I have to disagree with you on that one. the 5.45 is a potent round qand would rather use it than .223 The bullet design imparts a massive amount of its energy on the target, unlike fmj .223 that just drillls through.

[sdk1968]

i was told this was a really hot round and just thought it may cycle better than the 223...... im a noob remember? LOL

[JBaum]

Bullet design is not relative to the amount of recoil it can produce to operate the gun. Without massive lightening of the parts, I doubt it's ability to make the gun function.

I've an idea, let's talk someone into making both conversions and work out all the bugs, then we'll decide which one they should make for us. Yea, that's the ticket!

[sdk1968]

you guys are way over my head in this stuff..

so here is the dumb question time:

are either of those rounds even close to the same case size in the rear as the 8mm?

or does that even matter?

cause a 7.62x39 seems to be the weakest round mentioned in this thread.