Third Party Press

Waffenfabrik USA MP44

mrfarb

No War Eagles For You!
Staff member
I follow them on Facebook, they posted this Feb.1 as the rifle they submitted to ATF (obviously in sporter configuration). Looks like they might actually get these in, if so we could have a good supply of spare components sometime in the future.
 

Attachments

  • mp44.jpg
    mp44.jpg
    245.2 KB · Views: 302
I'd much rather have one of these than those bizarre "clone" rifles with HK trigger packs and interchangeable barrels. The blueprints are out there, I have a copy of them. Why is it so damn hard to just make something according to the plans?
 
I'd much rather have one of these than those bizarre "clone" rifles with HK trigger packs and interchangeable barrels. The blueprints are out there, I have a copy of them. Why is it so damn hard to just make something according to the plans?

Part of the problem is the original MP43/44/Stg44 was never a fully developed weapon, it has several flaws and truth be known it was only expected to last <10,000 rounds or 1-2 years of service before being replaced.

By the end of 44 the German Army was looking forward to replacing it with a far better Gun. (Stg45) Something else to keep in mind is it's not easy to start producing something (from scratch) that has not been produced for the last 70 years. A Gun like the AK47 has been in continuous production (in one from or another) for the last 65 years.
 
Last edited:
I agree, the MP44 was not a final design of a weapon, so what we really have is an experimental design rushed to production, a design that was still in the improvement stage. I guess we could shoot the G1 (AKA HK91) as it was the eventual end point for these engineers I believe.
 
These are just SSD rifles (The maker that supplied PTR) that are made here now. I am not optimistic that they have fundamentally fixed the issues the PTRs had. We will see.
Kevin
 
These are just SSD rifles (The maker that supplied PTR) that are made here now. I am not optimistic that they have fundamentally fixed the issues the PTRs had. We will see.
Kevin

If they are made here why do they need a thumbhole stock? Maybe some (most) parts are still made in Germany. There is still a lot of missing information on this project. As far as Issues are concerned I believe your correct. After my experience with the PTR44 It would take a 5 year warranty for me to even thing about getting one.
 
Last edited:
I agree, the MP44 was not a final design of a weapon, so what we really have is an experimental design rushed to production, a design that was still in the improvement stage. I guess we could shoot the G1 (AKA HK91) as it was the eventual end point for these engineers I believe.

I almost agree with you farb. I think the HK33 (5.56 version) is closest to what the end product would have been. IMO The G3 (G1 was an FAL) with it's size, weight and large cartridge, is not what the STG45 was intended to be. So, I think the HK93 is the closest I'll ever get to owning an STG45:





The MP44 is not mine unfortunately!
 
Man I like that hk33 with the wood buttstock!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
I guess we could shoot the G1 (AKA HK91) as it was the eventual end point for these engineers I believe.


I agree with Wilhelm, the HK33 in 5.56mm (AKA HK93 in semi-auto) is closer, given intermediate power ammo and such. Century C93 is a good rifle and available without the HK pricetag.

I had one, sold it, regret it to this day.

I like the wood too!! I plan on doing that very project and go further, I have a movie prop Denix MP44 I am going to swipe cosmetic parts from to dress up the HK, like the handguard, etc.

Jeff
 
...Century C93 is a good rifle and available without the HK pricetag..

They sure are. Those were some of their better products IMO. I grabbed 2 new from Atlantic? several years ago when they were quite cheap. Although they have appreciated in price they never really went up as much as I thought they would. I wonder if Century's awesome reputation for quality is holding them down?
 
That is possible...mine shot like a champ, rollers were set right, the only hitch with those is the cost of 30 round mags. I eventually found some plastic clear ones (like a G36 uses) but had to modify the mags as the well on the C93 was too long and the stops on the mags wouldn't let the catch engage.

I kept one 40 round HK mag for when I get another one. They aren't cheap.
 
If they are made here why do they need a thumbhole stock? Maybe some (most) parts are still made in Germany.

That was my thought, bud. There's NO need for the thumbhole stock if they are made here. The serial number range of affected rifles (from what I saw) started in the upper 700s and went into the lower 900s. If any of these "new" rifles fall in or close to that range, I would seriously inquire about heat treating of the parts, receiver functionality, head spacing, availability of SPARE FRICKIN PARTS, and would want a VERY good warranty before buying one.

Dog
 
I wonder if they aren't setting up production here fully until they get an approval?

With all the crap about the PTR44 out there they are going to have a hard time selling these unless they have a good warranty, readily available replacement parts and a lower price point. Think about it, you can get an SMG FG42 for just a tiny bit more than the PTR44s were going for. AND ZB mags are easier to find and less expensive.
 
I almost agree with you farb. I think the HK33 (5.56 version) is closest to what the end product would have been. IMO The G3 (G1 was an FAL) with it's size, weight and large cartridge, is not what the STG45 was intended to be. So, I think the HK93 is the closest I'll ever get to owning an STG45

The StG45 was almost mature by the time the Reich fell. Few things such as the bolt bounce needed to be ironed out (Ludwig Vorgrimler fixed this problem in 1950 with a spring loaded bolt head latch). The CETME incorporated many of the original StG45 features which also found their way into the H&K G3, nevertheless, in an evolutionary sense the CETME was a step back due to the 308 cartridge. The StG45, as the successor of the MP44, was designed around the 8x33 Kurz cartridge and had a 1" shorter receiver than the CETME. The original concept of the StG45 was based on close to mid range combat situations with select fire option. The recoil spring was in the butt stock, similar to the MP44. The delayed blowback roller locked action was the most advanced locking mechanism in 1945, making the gas operated cycling system (G43, MP44, FG42) obsolete. Wear related headspace could easily be corrected by installing larger rollers.

The wooden fore arm and actuator rod located forward of the trunnion made the CETME more front heavy than the StG45. The larger 308 cartridge required a longer magazine well and longer travel of the bolt assembly. The StG45 had an H&K style trigger pack, although the StG45 pack was more compact than that of the CETME or G3. Surprisingly, many pieces of the CETME bolt assembly were dimensioned very close to their respective StG45 counterparts. Had the CETME been designed to fire 7.62x39, it would have been much closer an offspring of the StG45.

I was always wondering why Vorgrimler didn't design the CETME as an improved version of the StG45. Maybe his employment at CEAM and his improvements to the gas operated CEAM Model 50 made him continue pursuing a more conventional rifle design? As with most late war German rifles, the Cool Factor of an StG45 leaves most other designs in the dust.

2001-59.1.jpg
 
I almost agree with you farb. I think the HK33 (5.56 version) is closest to what the end product would have been. IMO The G3 (G1 was an FAL) with it's size, weight and large cartridge, is not what the STG45 was intended to be. So, I think the HK93 is the closest I'll ever get to owning an STG45:





The MP44 is not mine unfortunately!

Back in 77 I bought an HK93 for that very reason spoken here.. Perhaps final evolution of the STG 45.. The 33 is a kick to rock FA as well.. Like several here I also picked up the C93 pistol and rifle and both worked great right from the box... Hoping the Waffenfabrik 44 will allow me to add to my SMG FG42 and perform as well too.
 
The StG45 was almost mature by the time the Reich fell. Few things such as the bolt bounce needed to be ironed out (Ludwig Vorgrimler fixed this problem in 1950 with a spring loaded bolt head latch). The CETME incorporated many of the original StG45 features which also found their way into the H&K G3, nevertheless, in an evolutionary sense the CETME was a step back due to the 308 cartridge. The StG45, as the successor of the MP44, was designed around the 8x33 Kurz cartridge and had a 1" shorter receiver than the CETME. The original concept of the StG45 was based on close to mid range combat situations with select fire option. The recoil spring was in the butt stock, similar to the MP44. The delayed blowback roller locked action was the most advanced locking mechanism in 1945, making the gas operated cycling system (G43, MP44, FG42) obsolete. Wear related headspace could easily be corrected by installing larger rollers.

The wooden fore arm and actuator rod located forward of the trunnion made the CETME more front heavy than the StG45. The larger 308 cartridge required a longer magazine well and longer travel of the bolt assembly. The StG45 had an H&K style trigger pack, although the StG45 pack was more compact than that of the CETME or G3. Surprisingly, many pieces of the CETME bolt assembly were dimensioned very close to their respective StG45 counterparts. Had the CETME been designed to fire 7.62x39, it would have been much closer an offspring of the StG45.

I was always wondering why Vorgrimler didn't design the CETME as an improved version of the StG45. Maybe his employment at CEAM and his improvements to the gas operated CEAM Model 50 made him continue pursuing a more conventional rifle design? As with most late war German rifles, the Cool Factor of an StG45 leaves most other designs in the dust.

2001-59.1.jpg

Thanks very much. Post where I learn a lot = great post. I sure did.

Jeff
 

Military Rifle Journal
Back
Top