MG 42 cone muzzle break with extra fin

[Blanksguy]

.....and a few more "fake" markings.......from E-Bay, today.....

Regards, RichardS
US Army, Retired

[Blanksguy]

usmc8489 and jbaum,
In all fairness........it appears to be a nice kit that would make a nice SA42 (or MG42 Post-Sample with correct license/SOT).......it does have a mostly complete original receiver (minus front-section) and other receiver parts to fully build missing section. There are additional parts (stock, etc........). .....with an unknown "reserve-price".

The MG42 Parts-Set up on GunBroker could also be a good exercise in what to look for (or look out for) when evaluating parts, parts-sets, and parts-kit for original markings (?). Someone save the photos for later evaluation for us.
As seem below......wouldn't an original WaA11 MG42 have original WaA11 markings (?).

.....or other markings (?).

Should we go on.........(?).
Regards, RichardS
US Army, Retired

[JBaum]

Blanksguy:

All I said in this thread was that it's not a muzzle break, it's a muzzle brake, but since you addressed your statement of approval for the kit to me, ("In all fairness"... when was I unfair?) I'll comment.

For someone to assume that 70 years after manufacture, that all parts should still be the ones the gun was manufactured with is silly. In 70 years, the gun has been shot, dropped, stored, carried, transferred, damaged, fixed, disassembled countless times by both knowledgeable and ignorant people, cut into pieces, and only the Lord knows what else. I'd be more suspicious of a perfectly matching gun than one that is close to matching.

People can drive themselves nuts trying to trace every mark on a gun, when the reality of a mark may be that someone dropped a wrench on it and accidentally made one of those "counterfeit" marks. Who knows?

It's too deep for me to spend my time deciding exactly what the marks should look like, nor does it really matter to me. Not my kit, I'm busy with other things, and expecting perfection is pointless. Discussing minutia at great length is entertaining to some, but not everyone, and that's the way it should be, so I am not in any way discouraging you from proving that fake stamps exist by posting pictures of dozens of them. I was convinced of it long ago, but there are still a few who may not believe, so please continue to educate.

I'm glad you decided it's a nice kit, I already had the same opinion a week ago, regardless of a few marks that made no sense, didn't match the pictures in a book, and maybe had a 19 instead of an 11 under them. Maybe some inspectors took their stamps with them when they went to another plant for a week or two until the bomb damage was fixed at their usual place. Who knows? Little is 100% certain about stampings. Most "certainty" is actually only a high probability, some higher than others, but still not 100% verifiable. Researching 70 year old proof marks is way less than unimpeachably accurate. It's all a best guess, and I'd rather not make guesses on such things. But that's just me.

John

[othersmightlive]

This 34 has a stamp like mine too. http://www.gunbroker.com/Auction/ViewIt ... =471514448 bolt and bipod