Recuperator discussion- MG74 vs MG3 vs MG-42
Posted: Sat Aug 28, 2010 11:01 pm
Hmmm....never thought about this, or noticed. I pulled apart my MG-74 tonight to look at the recuperator arrangement because I was having a long-distance argument over the development of the Steyr version of the MG-42/59. Both of us always assumed the MG3 recuperator (and hardware) was used, as in all other true MG-42/59's & MG3's. We knew the 42/59 recuperator design extra length was handled by the cut-out in the buffer body flange corner, and so assumed the MG-74 replicated this.
Well so much for that. Damn, Now we have three recuperator styles.
- Wartime MG-42(MG-1A1, MG2)that uses the recuperator backing tab that is part of the trigger frame mounting flange,
- MG3 that is longer and uses the buffer body flange for backing,
- MG-74 that uses a "mid-length" recuperator length that backs up against the bottom buffer locking tab itself
.....so much for stocking cheap MG3 parts to use in the MG-74, I guess.
Of note, look how the bottom buffer locking tab pictured here in the MG-74 is also welded to the inner wall of the actual receiver itself! LOTS of added strength for impact load transference there! Have to wonder if this is because the MG-74 uses the hydraulic buffer and taking the impact loading off the actual buffer body flange was needed. I have always thought that this MG-74 shoots the smoothest of all the "MG-42" style guns and always attributed that to the hydraulic buffer alone, now, I am starting to wonder if perhaps taking the impact loads off the buffer body has a lot more to do with it.
-TomH
Note also how the MG-74 hydraulic buffer body does NOT have a corner cut out for recuperator clearance like MG-42/59's & MG3's:
Well so much for that. Damn, Now we have three recuperator styles.
- Wartime MG-42(MG-1A1, MG2)that uses the recuperator backing tab that is part of the trigger frame mounting flange,
- MG3 that is longer and uses the buffer body flange for backing,
- MG-74 that uses a "mid-length" recuperator length that backs up against the bottom buffer locking tab itself
.....so much for stocking cheap MG3 parts to use in the MG-74, I guess.
Of note, look how the bottom buffer locking tab pictured here in the MG-74 is also welded to the inner wall of the actual receiver itself! LOTS of added strength for impact load transference there! Have to wonder if this is because the MG-74 uses the hydraulic buffer and taking the impact loading off the actual buffer body flange was needed. I have always thought that this MG-74 shoots the smoothest of all the "MG-42" style guns and always attributed that to the hydraulic buffer alone, now, I am starting to wonder if perhaps taking the impact loads off the buffer body has a lot more to do with it.
-TomH
Note also how the MG-74 hydraulic buffer body does NOT have a corner cut out for recuperator clearance like MG-42/59's & MG3's: