Third Party Press

FG42 Type I Progress! SMG site

B

bjrmg

Member
More encouraging pics on SMG site! Looks like first "mule" nearing R&D. This will be worth 5K with warranty and spare parts!! This one will also be worth the wait. My hat is off again to the Smith Manufacturing Group. Thanks guys. bjrmg #1835
 
Hi,
We are of course hoping that it will be for many. Trying to position ourselves to buy enough time to get it finished/sorted to the point we can just start shooting it regularly running up the round count/looking for problems and send one to ATF. It is a little nicer than the first prototype type II we made and carried around to show. We actually lost at least one sale after the listed potential buyer got to see the prototype. Now I look at it and understand why he backed away.... lol

The prototype type I sports a wooden buttstock now and that part will probably be the last thing we throw money at after we get everything else lined up and going - it is a big money part to get going. Any of you experts in the sheet metal stamping art? we need to get serious bids on this part and see if we can have it made outside or if we have to immerse ourselves anew - I really would rather not. Not many comments or questions so far about the rifle but feel free as I am interested to hear. We did this same thing on the type II and although we eventually have to make the choices and go in a direction we took things that we could into consideration then and will now.

Early observations on the type I: I made trigger housing for the test mule with a more traditionally oriented pistol grip as the steeply angle original style sorta pinches the web of my hand. The thinner, more arched buttstock shape dinged my cheekbone but that may have been from too hard a cheek weld trying to look down the barrel to hit the backstop with no sights. Yes I was in a hurry to make it go bang...

Proud to say at this point on the type II that we have not sold one firing pin or extractor etc to fix a failed part after two years. And yes some folks do shoot their rifles - at least they claim to.... We do have a customer with over 2 thousand through his now that is on his second or third extractor spring. Not sure what is up with that but we will find a better part asap.

Rick
 
Rick, built these a little looser with respect to trunnion bolt body clearances. I've been contacted by a quite a few guys having the same lock up issues I've had.
 
Hi Will,
The problem you describe, if it is the one that only appears when it warms up a little is one that can have about 3 causes and we worked on lots of "thats it" ideas before we decided there was more than one answer possible. But yes, one of them is need to allow about .003 more clearance between those two parts and the idea of it wearing in in a thousand rounds is a poor one. Those parts have a surface hardness that results in about zero surface wear from the parts sliding against each other. We could probably fix it for you pretty easy but we need the rifle......... : )

Lots of things learned through building the type II will go into the type I but I have built enough different firearms to know that not all ideas transfer to what appears a "near duplicate" system. The sizes and weights of the component parts of the two are different enough that I anticipate another - hopefully smaller - learning curve. I do think it will be worth it though as a side by side comparison of the two is not all that dramatic but holding it in your hands it feels quit a bit smaller and is hopefully - going to be way cool.

Preliminary measurements/weights between the two looks like the difference between our two will bear out the differences in the originals. I am exited about this one!

Rick
 
smgguns said:
Hi Will,
The problem you describe, if it is the one that only appears when it warms up a little is one that can have about 3 causes and we worked on lots of "thats it" ideas before we decided there was more than one answer possible. But yes, one of them is need to allow about .003 more clearance between those two parts and the idea of it wearing in in a thousand rounds is a poor one. Those parts have a surface hardness that results in about zero surface wear from the parts sliding against each other. We could probably fix it for you pretty easy but we need the rifle......... : )

Lots of things learned through building the type II will go into the type I but I have built enough different firearms to know that not all ideas transfer to what appears a "near duplicate" system. The sizes and weights of the component parts of the two are different enough that I anticipate another - hopefully smaller - learning curve. I do think it will be worth it though as a side by side comparison of the two is not all that dramatic but holding it in your hands it feels quit a bit smaller and is hopefully - going to be way cool.

Preliminary measurements/weights between the two looks like the difference between our two will bear out the differences in the originals. I am exited about this one!

Rick
Click to expand...


Yes, I DO need to send it in to you. Sometimes I'm quite hardheaded. As for the Type 1, you probably have a sale here. It seems I'm going to be perpetually cash poor but well stocked in the rifle department for the foreseeable future. Oh well, I make it to spend it.....
 
Just put it in the case and send it back! Please include a list of everything you are having a problem with and we will try to get it all taken care of - if possible. We have never shot the type of ammo you are shooting so as to problems possibly related to gas pressure differences or whatever we would need some of that ammo to try to ensure the fix. Otherwise a description of the problem and we can make an attempt.

Looking at the results you posted of your last range trip I think you had one bolt over base failure? If so that is most likely a marginally weak spring on the last few rounds type of issue or a borderline gas pressure issue - either high or low - but unlikely to only cause one failure in that many rounds. We will give it a look and tell you what we would like to do and let you decide. You pay postage as it is out of warranty, give me a little time - couple of weeks if needed - to sort it out and I will not charge for the service.

Rick
 
Rick, the rifle looks incredible so far. I'm really looking forward to getting one of these. Will the grip angle return to the original angle on the final production rifle? Personally, the overly dramatic grip angle has always been one of the things I have personally loved about the type I.
 
Meridius said:
Rick, the rifle looks incredible so far. I'm really looking forward to getting one of these. Will the grip angle return to the original angle on the final production rifle? Personally, the overly dramatic grip angle has always been one of the things I have personally loved about the type I.
Click to expand...

Agreed - and the trigger guard -

Shoei never got it right, using the same style trigger guard as the second model.
The first has a curved piece of steel.
 
The Shoei has the angled grip like the original and that is what the production rifles will look like. And actually Shoei did get it right as the style grip they replicated was that on all the early rifles and is even the style shown in the original operators manual. The later sheet metal loop was done to open it up as it was too small for gloved fingers to fit very well. The more vertical grip is for my comfort in shooting it a lot.

That is one of the points we have to pick a direction on as we have had people say "yeah, gotta have glove room" and others want the earlier / cleaner look and think the sheet metal looks like a cheap afterthought............ I guess we will go with the consensus of opinion or figure out a way - shouldn't be too hard - to offer either or. What does everyone think?

Rick
 
smgguns said:
The Shoei has the angled grip like the original and that is what the production rifles will look like. And actually Shoei did get it right as the style grip they replicated was that on all the early rifles and is even the style shown in the original operators manual. The later sheet metal loop was done to open it up as it was too small for gloved fingers to fit very well. The more vertical grip is for my comfort in shooting it a lot.

That is one of the points we have to pick a direction on as we have had people say "yeah, gotta have glove room" and others want the earlier / cleaner look and think the sheet metal looks like a cheap afterthought............ I guess we will go with the consensus of opinion or figure out a way - shouldn't be too hard - to offer either or. What does everyone think?

Rick
Click to expand...

Is it possible to make this an option for buyers- i.e. make the earlier type grip as standard and chop it up and add the cheap sheetmetal extension for those that want it? I have no idea how either is made so don't know if the later type is a modification of the earlier type or was a completely new design.
 
For me, if I am going to buy a reproduction I want it to be as close to the original as absolutely possible. So if it is a decision between two original options it doesn't necessarily matter much to me. If I had to pick I'd probably choose the machined one.
 
mrfarb said:
Is it possible to make this an option for buyers- i.e. make the earlier type grip as standard and chop it up and add the cheap sheetmetal extension for those that want it? I have no idea how either is made so don't know if the later type is a modification of the earlier type or was a completely new design.
Click to expand...

Honestly Iam not sure from just looking at pictures. Once we get to that stage of things maybe we can get some input from owners of originals with the sheet metal version. Both are cool I think as is some of the one off type I with case deflector and the test prototype with the bipod mounted up front. We will offer as many options as possible but at least with the type I the finish choices will be easier to keep up with. They were all painted black that I am aware of and scratch easy from what I have read but their are some pretty durable paint finishes now - as well as a deep black blue job.
 
Rick,

I'm totally on board for a T Eins! As original as possible with the grip. I've used my shoei at many film shoots and always get the "love the grip" comments..

Love the work so far on this latest obsession in progress.. Only issues I've had with my T-II all related to live fire with the .308 ammo you recommended to avoid... Getting friends not to cock it from safe the only other.. As always, great werk Mann!
 
I have never seen a photo of an original first model with the solid trigger guard, Rick -
I didn't know that was how it looked in the manual -
I am sure you have performed more due diligence than me, so I will defer to you.
I personally have never seen one pictured.

I would be buying one ostensibly for film work, too - that is how all of my firearms are owned, that is the purpose of my permits - I have no personal collection per-se. So the solid trigger guard is of less interest, even though by-the-book.
I am interested in the ones carried at the Abruzzo raid, in Europe, etc.,

I have talked with Tomio at Shoei quite a lot about these FG replicas -
I messed with the guard on one of our dummies for looks - but, it's an altogether different project to a shooting semi auto.
*Tomio was pleased that the real FG42 muzzle brake threaded onto the replica -



Your work as always looks fantastic and I am really excited to see where you go from here with the build.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Military Rifle Journal
Back
Top