Third Party Press

The super late ac45's

Tiger 2 Tank

Tiger 2 Tank

Senior Member
Hello fellow K.43 enthusiasts,
The P38 Forum had a neat thread about the very late Walther ac coded PP's. This also intertwined with the late P.38 ac45's. These pistols have variations to them that we collect. In the PP world there are the matching and mismatched group of ac coded, blank slide pistols. The P.38's are the ac45's that are matching and mismatched as well, but are in the c block and some scarce d block pistols.

So, I have a question on the late K.43's. If the P.38's and PP's were found in the factory at the end of the War like that, (some found and some assembled by American G.I.'s) why couldn't the same be said for late K.43's? Could some mismatched Walther c and d block K.43 rifles be legit, brought back rifles?

What say the experienced guys? What do you think; could some of the dismissed mismatched be actually okay?
 
Tiger, I lean towards saying yes. I know that this is the case for BLM e blocks. Kowalski and I have looked a pristine examples that have clear factory errors and mis-match parts. So why wouldn't Walther be the same? German firearms are not nearly as perfect as some want to believe. Great topic for discussion. I am curious what others think.
 
mdarnell19 said:
Tiger, I lean towards saying yes. I know that this is the case for BLM e blocks. Kowalski and I have looked a pristine examples that have clear factory errors and mis-match parts. So why wouldn't Walther be the same? German firearms are not nearly as perfect as some want to believe. Great topic for discussion. I am curious what others think.
Click to expand...

Yes. I know people (you may have been one) that had eyes on correct mismatched stock BLM's. So, that's for sure.
 
As far as I ever knew that was the story, lots were factory captured. Not sure if assembled by GIs but maybe. But you don't seem To see a whole lot a straight mm ac45 k43. Some with blank bolt carrier, but jack on here has that completed sniper with unnumbered carrier, I have a hard time believing the mount was numbered before the gun was finished. So some were probably just made like this. It's also tougher to tell as they dropped the stock serial.
 
Good point Andrew. I would want to see more examples of Walther rifles to believe it was the same as BLM. I think the d block rifles with un-numbered bolt carriers is a late war variation.
 
I think the late war "d" block rifles with unnumbered carriers were unfinished guns. Receiver serial was done before bolt numbering, and I think bolt numbering was probably done after fitting the assembly and test firing / beschuß.
 
When was stock numbering done on G/K43s? I was just reading BBoTW trying to better comprehend 98k assembly. If G/K43 production was like 98k production I would end up with a mismatched stock.

Are Walther K43s the only weapon that were packed up and shipped out to be completed elsewhere (BLM)?
 
My rifle

CanadianAR said:
As far as I ever knew that was the story, lots were factory captured. Not sure if assembled by GIs but maybe. But you don't seem To see a whole lot a straight mm ac45 k43. Some with blank bolt carrier, but jack on here has that completed sniper with unnumbered carrier, I have a hard time believing the mount was numbered before the gun was finished. So some were probably just made like this. It's also tougher to tell as they dropped the stock serial.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the shout out to my late d matched sniper pic stickied here. You are correct as it has all final proofs and completed. We tend to think these went out the door 1,2,3,4 in sequence. I am pretty certain that blocks go out the door like 2015d...2067d....1467d...4355d....

My sniper was probably on another line for sniper rifles specifically. My guess is they were in crates and ready to ship and captured.
 
mrfarb said:
I think the late war "d" block rifles with unnumbered carriers were unfinished guns. Receiver serial was done before bolt numbering, and I think bolt numbering was probably done after fitting the assembly and test firing / beschuß.
Click to expand...

I am not so certain. We see that Walther has a pattern of dropping the numbering of parts. With G41 rifles, they dropped the hand guard, then the safety, then the barrel bands. On G43 rifles they dropped the stock number by late 1944. And we obviously see this on K98k's so why no G43's also? So it makes sense to me that they could have decided to drop the numbering of the bolt carrier.

There are other d block rifles with un-numbered bolt carriers. True they could be unfinished rifles. But Jack's rifle helps support this theory since the mount would have been numbered last (I assume). So it is either a late variation or the rifle is a bolt mis-match. Perhaps in time we will know for sure.
 
Show me any K98k issued with a firing proof on the bolt that is unnumbered as normal practice, they don't exist. It was not accepted to have components subject to firing proofs at factories left unnumbered on the last 98k's made.

As to the K43, there is no definite proof it was issued with the unmarked bolt. Sure, it's that way now, but what if the bolt broke during the accuracy test? What if it broke postwar and was added then? That's the problem, you are just assuming the rifle is 100% as issued. It's a neat gun, probably original, but the unmarked bolt assembly is an issue as it is in other late K43's.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Does the bolt carrier actually affect the headspace on a G43? The bolt and flaps would work with any carrier, correct? If that's true, it doesn't really need to be numbered.
 
mrfarb said:
Show me any K98k issued with a firing proof on the bolt that is unnumbered as normal practice, they don't exist. It was not accepted to have components subject to firing proofs at factories left unnumbered on the last 98k's made.

As to the K43, there is no definite proof it was issued with the unmarked bolt. Sure, it's that way now, but what if the bolt broke during the accuracy test? What if it broke postwar and was added then? That's the problem, you are just assuming the rifle is 100% as issued. It's a neat gun, probably original, but the unmarked bolt assembly is an issue as it is in other late K43's.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

The bolt would be proofed and serialled. The bolt carrier is not as important and never received "proofing"
There are quite a few ac45 with matching bolt, flaps and firing pin carrier and unnumbered carrier....
 
What part is the most commonly broken component on the K43 bolt?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
mrfarb said:
What part is the most commonly broken component on the K43 bolt?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

I would guess mainly firing pins or extractors. Locking flaps could also be an issue if one or neither match the rifle.
 
Interesting discussion, and we may never know the real answers.

There are a lot of late war G/K43's with completly un-numbered bolt assemblies. My best guess they were never issued and most likely sitting in the factory that way or, a USGI assembled them for a "trophy". Probably the same thing happend with QVE's when the British took over the plant... these rifles were possibly traded to a USGI at some point, since the British were supposedly not allowed to bring a rifle home, from what I heard.

I would put the extractor flying off and locking lugs and FP as normal parts to fail on a G/K43 bolt.
 
My point was anyone that shoots these knows the bolt carriers can and will crack.

I wish someone could locate the TL 1003 equivalent for K43's like we have for K98k's.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Can't remember the last time I even shot one of these...40+ years ago!? :laugh:

I have seen many decent "Bring back" rifles with a lug replaced and the extractor missing and even the cracked bolt at the back (not so common) on late war rifles.

I am yet to see one, in person, with a cracked bolt carrier. I have heard of that happening, multiple times, just never witnessed it.

I believe the cracking of the bolt carrier issues were was eliminated/solved mid war, when the added the re-inforcement rib up there.
 
Last edited:
Maybe Kelly could post up his serial numbers of ac45s with blank bolt carrier? There are quite a few otherwise matching guns less that one part.
IF Gi assembled I would not expect it to
Be the same part all the time.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Military Rifle Journal
Back
Top