That's always been one of my biggest criticisms of the German arms industry: They were never able to make a mass produce a simple semi-auto rifle, or one that didn't destroy itself after a few thousand rounds. They had examples of the SVT, Garand, M1 Carbine, BAR, MAS 40, god knows how many prototype guns from other countries, etc. I just don't get how the botched the process so thoroughly.
G41m ...
- Thread starter tbied2
- Start date
Warrior1354
ax - hole
You can blame a lot of that on the German weapons manufacturing department. The men that were in charge precisely said you will make a semi auto and not bore the barrel to use the gas to cycle the action. Plus early on in the war German infantry tactics were all focused on the machine gun. It wasn't until the Germans were all the eastern front and were coming up against Russian semi auto rifles not to mention all the sub machine guns they issued. The warfare in the beginning was all fine and dandy when you were moving but when the Germans had to dig in and hold ground that's when it changed.
You what too know how effective PPSH41 sub machine gun was. A U.S commander during the Korean War said it was probably one of the most effective small arms on the battlefield during the war. American troops dealing with waves of Chinese forces armed with these really caused a headache.
And then it wasn't until 1943 when the Germans finally just adopted the SVT 40 gas system for the G/K43 rifle. Believe it or not the rifle was actually pretty reliable but it lack so much in durability. Of course it was a weapon designed under war time conditions where as the M1 rifle was first being developed in the 1920s. And even after that rifle was adopted we were still improving on it in too 1940.
I think a weapon that would have really changed the semi auto department for Germany is if they would have got the early FN49 design plans. Lucky for us the designer escaped Belgium and took all the plans with them when he fled to Britain.
You what too know how effective PPSH41 sub machine gun was. A U.S commander during the Korean War said it was probably one of the most effective small arms on the battlefield during the war. American troops dealing with waves of Chinese forces armed with these really caused a headache.
And then it wasn't until 1943 when the Germans finally just adopted the SVT 40 gas system for the G/K43 rifle. Believe it or not the rifle was actually pretty reliable but it lack so much in durability. Of course it was a weapon designed under war time conditions where as the M1 rifle was first being developed in the 1920s. And even after that rifle was adopted we were still improving on it in too 1940.
I think a weapon that would have really changed the semi auto department for Germany is if they would have got the early FN49 design plans. Lucky for us the designer escaped Belgium and took all the plans with them when he fled to Britain.
my66coupe
Senior Member
Welcome to the "M" club. I saw this one at the SOS. Most of these have issues in one way or another. Sanded stocks and mismatched muzzle cones being the most common. A laminate stock is definitely less common then walnut. Quite a few of these are cracked at the wrist. I don't doubt this one had a similar fate and was repaired at some point.
tbied2
Senior Member
41m
... today; i took the operating rods out of two rifles. a 1941 model and a 1942. in the picture;.. the top rod is from the 1941 model. it is 11 & 15/16" long and made from heavy stamped steel. the ends are crimped and then machined. the bottom rod is the op-rod from a 1942 model. it is a solid machined piece and 11 & 11/32" long. both op-rods are .28 - .30" wide. when laid flat, they are .15" high. you should be able to make one from a solid steel rod. i am not a machinist, so,.. these could be confusing, but you get the idea. you should be able to look at the little slot in your rifle to see the approximate curved shape. since they were outa the safe, i did a little cleaning and oiling, plus photo op....
... today; i took the operating rods out of two rifles. a 1941 model and a 1942. in the picture;.. the top rod is from the 1941 model. it is 11 & 15/16" long and made from heavy stamped steel. the ends are crimped and then machined. the bottom rod is the op-rod from a 1942 model. it is a solid machined piece and 11 & 11/32" long. both op-rods are .28 - .30" wide. when laid flat, they are .15" high. you should be able to make one from a solid steel rod. i am not a machinist, so,.. these could be confusing, but you get the idea. you should be able to look at the little slot in your rifle to see the approximate curved shape. since they were outa the safe, i did a little cleaning and oiling, plus photo op....
Last edited:
Tiger 2 Tank
Senior Member
Daaammmnnnn, three of them! One is hard enough to find.
iron bender
750 Press Operator
I could make the machined type of this op-rod. The stamped version is out of the question. If someone is interested pm me. It won't be inexpensive. At least a couple hundred bucks. Emphasis on "at least". Dimensions need to be correct.
Thanks for posting! Mine is in the 8000 serial range (stamped 1942) so it sounds like the machined rod.
Have a friend whom had a totally butchered G41(M). It had both a laminated stock and sheet-metal trigger guard. I got my first 'M back in the 1980s. It was pretty decent by today's standards, but had a few MM parts and stock was lightly cleaned. In any event, as a collector/shooter, I just had to try it out. So, took it to the local, open range and was going to run 10 rounds thru it. Unfortunately, on the 6th round the rifle failed to eject, and bolt had jammed. What happened was one of the cam lobes on the bolt body had broken off (piece about the size of one's fingernail). To say I was unhappy would be an understatement. Since then, I have always wondered if this defect was perhaps one of the reasons the rifle was a failure (other than the most over-engineered shoulder-arm the Germans issued in WW2).
So, in talking later to the fellow collector whom had the butchered 'M, he was more than happy to give me what I had in my rifle. Since the bolt assembly was MM in that rifle, he just swapped out the matching bolt from his wreck, and sold it with the broken bolt from my rifle, to another, well known arms collector. However, in doing so, the latter asked that if, should he find another complete bolt in commensurate condition, would he swap out the bolts (since the one he kept matched the "wreck" 'M)? My friend said he would. Several years went by and the WKAC turned up at the Great Western show with a replacement bolt which met the requirements. However, my friend, whom never cared much for the guy, decided not to follow thru despite agreeing to do so. The WKGC asked if I could intervene, but even my efforts were of no avail, and that is where it ended.
In any event, I recently visited another friend. Since he no longer has any interest in restoring C & R arms (not that he ever did much other than gather up spares for potential future use), I came away with all his German long arm components to "redistribute" in his behalf. Surprisingly I found a G41(M) rear sight housing, leaf, and base. In a pan of unknown parts, sitting for two weeks, was a unknown trigger assembly. Only today did I notice the three digits stamped on it matched the rear sight assembly! Unfortunately I have been unable to find a complete parts breakdown on the 'M, so I hope no additional components get overlooked because I have no reference to go by...
So, in talking later to the fellow collector whom had the butchered 'M, he was more than happy to give me what I had in my rifle. Since the bolt assembly was MM in that rifle, he just swapped out the matching bolt from his wreck, and sold it with the broken bolt from my rifle, to another, well known arms collector. However, in doing so, the latter asked that if, should he find another complete bolt in commensurate condition, would he swap out the bolts (since the one he kept matched the "wreck" 'M)? My friend said he would. Several years went by and the WKAC turned up at the Great Western show with a replacement bolt which met the requirements. However, my friend, whom never cared much for the guy, decided not to follow thru despite agreeing to do so. The WKGC asked if I could intervene, but even my efforts were of no avail, and that is where it ended.
In any event, I recently visited another friend. Since he no longer has any interest in restoring C & R arms (not that he ever did much other than gather up spares for potential future use), I came away with all his German long arm components to "redistribute" in his behalf. Surprisingly I found a G41(M) rear sight housing, leaf, and base. In a pan of unknown parts, sitting for two weeks, was a unknown trigger assembly. Only today did I notice the three digits stamped on it matched the rear sight assembly! Unfortunately I have been unable to find a complete parts breakdown on the 'M, so I hope no additional components get overlooked because I have no reference to go by...
Last edited:
mike radford
Senior Member
I agree.
That stock repair was very well done by the skilled.
Another example as to why not to shoot a valuable collectable, although I admit to doing so at times.
I too have wondered why the Germans did not get a good full power semi-auto, at least when compared to an M-1. Of course the MP44 was a much wiser way to go for real battlefield conditions. Their own internal studies showed that but Hitler resisted. The Soviet submachine guns pretty much replaced the SVT and were cheap and effective. Full power semi-auto battle rifles were becoming a dinosaur.
Kammerjaeger
Well-known member
I think Warrior said it earlier. What the Germans really needed was Dieudonné Saive’s magnificent FN-49 design. Alas, it was not to be as he escaped Belgium with his blueprints before the Germans got there. Instead, because of pride and arrogance, the Germans wasted 3 years developing a design that was in several cases (which they were undoubtedly in possession of) already mature. Having said that, IMO, the G41(M) in partiular was magnificent in its overengineered complexity and impracticality. It is, despite of these things and because of these things, a beautiful firearm. I would dearly love to own one.
KJ
KJ
Thanks for that. Have the book and didn't even think to look there. The photo is more than adequate to identify the components, so will look thru those left-overs for anything I may have missed. The parts came from rifle 12696, which must have had something tragic happen to it, as the parts are in excellent condition...
