Late K43 matching sniper rig
- Thread starter jack944
- Start date
Jack, Very nice....BILL
Wow, that's a beauty. I've been looking for a matched-mount K43 sniper for a few years now, and they are very difficult to find in this condition. You're fortunate to have one in your collection. I'm glad to see that you've left it untouched. So many of these rifles have been hurt by improper cleaning.
I guess no serial # on the bolt indicates an armorer's replacement?... doesn't bother me a bit on this rifle.
Thanks for sharing it!
Sincerely,
Mike
I guess no serial # on the bolt indicates an armorer's replacement?... doesn't bother me a bit on this rifle.
Thanks for sharing it!
Sincerely,
Mike
Nice......
It does not get much better than that.
Good to see some activity in this section. Seems like it has been a slow summer for some.
Brian
It does not get much better than that.
Good to see some activity in this section. Seems like it has been a slow summer for some.
Brian
Bigdibbs88
"Ach du lieber!"
Agree...thats about as good as it gets. did that come straight outta the woodwork?
note, the carrier is also a earlier war type. probably rejected earlier on for some minor reason then used in the last months of production...or they just reached the bottom of the bin and it was there.
I did not know that. Thanks for the clarification!
miles136
Well-known member
Brian and Jack are both mentors of mine so keep that in mind when I start to type and I actually appear to know what Im talking about
Nice rifle Jack, thanks for posting I remember when you got it after I scored TWO matching mount guns in one month and you couldnt stand that
IMO these types of bolts are NOT armorers replacements...I have seen at least four other D blocks, two of which I own(ed)....these types of carriers to me look like very early carriers that were never finish milled for the bolt hold open latch...note ther is no reinforcing rib on top, the top part is much more thin and squared off than other typical late war carriers, like those that show the reverse "45" markings....like Brian, I think these were left over, in the parts bin, and worked good enough for late WWII so they used them up, or were due to a start up of the old forging machines??....one can also find the standard mid war type carriers, the late "45" type I mentioned, and these, which I consider a type of their own
also, the guns I have seen with these appear nearly unissued and may have been captured before any or much use at all, so an armorer's bolt doesnt make much sense in a nearly new gun...now in an earlier or mid war gun, makes sense....one or two that I thought were in fact armorers carriers were shaped different
Notice too that Jack's gun has one of the original scope covers that make use of thin brown leather for the straps instead of the usual black leather...each one Ive seen came on late war stuff
agree.
Another theory about the un numbered bolts is that they were still on the factory floor "in process" (awaiting final numbering??) when it was captured...since the "d" block marks the end of complete production at Walther for these. I am sure the factory was in quite the state of confusion those last few weeks, knowing very well that we are fast approaching.
Like Jonathan stated, most of the un-numbered bolts have been like new. We will never know.
Another theory about the un numbered bolts is that they were still on the factory floor "in process" (awaiting final numbering??) when it was captured...since the "d" block marks the end of complete production at Walther for these. I am sure the factory was in quite the state of confusion those last few weeks, knowing very well that we are fast approaching.
Like Jonathan stated, most of the un-numbered bolts have been like new. We will never know.
Thanks for elaborating on the un-numbered bolts. This is very informative. Had I not read this, I might have assumed that a previous collector of the rifle added the un-numbered bolt to “upgrade” it from one that was mismatched.
I imagine that there are examples of late-war K43’s on which a fraudster has added matching numbers to an unmarked bolt thinking that they were “improving” it (I hope not many).
Thanks again for the enlightenment. I can see that there are some very knowledgeable people here.
Mike
I imagine that there are examples of late-war K43’s on which a fraudster has added matching numbers to an unmarked bolt thinking that they were “improving” it (I hope not many).
Thanks again for the enlightenment. I can see that there are some very knowledgeable people here.
Mike
Last edited:
jack944
Senior Member
Good
Mike,
You are correct. Most books including Darrin's super effort simply cannot contain all information about every variation. Darrin notes some bolt variations in the d block in his book. Unless you talk to guys that are here and have seen many rifles, you could make the incorrect assumption about what you see. You will find the more you collect that exceptions to rule occur more often than noted. Beware of absolutes that "all" guns have certain characterstics. Most often the statistical data set is so small that real conclusions are at best guidelines..not absolute.
You are on the mark about collectors "restoring or making rifles correct". I know of an "advanced" collector who took the correct stock off of a bcd4 Mauser 135 receiver proofed dual code. He didn't understand about about dual codes and assumed the gun "should" have a bcd "c" proofed stock and replaced it. In reality the original stock that was on it proofed 135 was correct.
Welcome aboard.
Mike,
You are correct. Most books including Darrin's super effort simply cannot contain all information about every variation. Darrin notes some bolt variations in the d block in his book. Unless you talk to guys that are here and have seen many rifles, you could make the incorrect assumption about what you see. You will find the more you collect that exceptions to rule occur more often than noted. Beware of absolutes that "all" guns have certain characterstics. Most often the statistical data set is so small that real conclusions are at best guidelines..not absolute.
You are on the mark about collectors "restoring or making rifles correct". I know of an "advanced" collector who took the correct stock off of a bcd4 Mauser 135 receiver proofed dual code. He didn't understand about about dual codes and assumed the gun "should" have a bcd "c" proofed stock and replaced it. In reality the original stock that was on it proofed 135 was correct.
Welcome aboard.
Last edited:
jack944
Senior Member
Jack, those are words to live by. I'm realizing it more and more. I agree with you that the use of reference books is best treated as a jumping-off point towards further and/or more accurate knowledge. Often, I have just as many questions as I do answers after reading certain references, but I guess that's what keeps it all interesting.
