Third Party Press

Factory replaced rear sight... A hypothesis.

Bob in OHIO

Senior Member
Since this is a research/ data collection forum.... here's a new one. This L-block dot 1943 is a matched rifle, yet the rear sight has a different number. The rear sight is vintage 1943 Brunn in font and numbering location.

The reason I suspect it's a factory replacement is the base is numbered per Brunn, but there is a "2" below the 9552. I have never seen a "2" beneath the sn like this before. Thinking here of rebarrels with the 0,2.

Seems like the possibility of Bubba changing out this rear sight is about zero, IMO. If he/she did, the fit is perfect, the rear sight is Brunn '43 vintage, and the "2" beneath the serial is coming from who?
 

Attachments

  • 9602L.rec.jpg
    9602L.rec.jpg
    136.4 KB · Views: 90
  • 9602L.blt.jpg
    9602L.blt.jpg
    87.4 KB · Views: 76
  • dot.43.9602L.rear.1.jpg
    dot.43.9602L.rear.1.jpg
    80.3 KB · Views: 74
  • dot.43.9602L.rear.2.jpg
    dot.43.9602L.rear.2.jpg
    143 KB · Views: 82
  • dot.43.9602L.rear.3.jpg
    dot.43.9602L.rear.3.jpg
    156.5 KB · Views: 87
I like your theory, but I'm not so sure about your "2" idea. So we know the way these were made, after test firing the rifles were either passed or returned to the workshops for adjustment. So, here's my theory - lets say the rifle doesn't pass accuracy test, and the rear sight components are the suspect. Tech swaps rear sight components out and sends it back for testing. The factory workshops were under tremendous pressure to get a certain number of weapons finished per day, there is even a column in the report about rifles sent back for repair and how long they were there. So, anyway, the sight is swapped out with another rifle with similar issues (note how close in serial they are). It's very possible that this was just a factory repair for a final inspection accuracy issue.

Now, you and I both know, buy the gun not the story. So in effect (for collectors) you have a mismatched rear sight dot43. You lose some value, but to someone that can see the big picture of 98k manufacturing it's a blip on the radar screen. Is it possible the "2" indicates it's replaced? I guess, but that isn't the usual mechanism for replaced components.
 
..lets say the rifle doesn't pass accuracy test, and the rear sight components are the suspect. Tech swaps rear sight components out and sends it back for testing. The factory workshops were under tremendous pressure to get a certain number of weapons finished per day.

I totally buy this story... in fact if that solved the problem I also probably would not even swap them back. And yes the font is spot on and the rifles are very close in s/n.
 
I like your theory, but I'm not so sure about your "2" idea. So we know the way these were made, after test firing the rifles were either passed or returned to the workshops for adjustment. So, here's my theory - lets say the rifle doesn't pass accuracy test, and the rear sight components are the suspect. Tech swaps rear sight components out and sends it back for testing. The factory workshops were under tremendous pressure to get a certain number of weapons finished per day, there is even a column in the report about rifles sent back for repair and how long they were there. So, anyway, the sight is swapped out with another rifle with similar issues (note how close in serial they are). It's very possible that this was just a factory repair for a final inspection accuracy issue.

Now, you and I both know, buy the gun not the story. So in effect (for collectors) you have a mismatched rear sight dot43. You lose some value, but to someone that can see the big picture of 98k manufacturing it's a blip on the radar screen. Is it possible the "2" indicates it's replaced? I guess, but that isn't the usual mechanism for replaced components.

The factory swap for accuracy correction is a good hypothesis for sure.... So let's go with that as our working hypothesis.... but how then do we explain the second "2" ... it seems plausible that event 1 (the swap) creates event 2 (the "2").
 
The factory swap for accuracy correction is a good hypothesis for sure.... So let's go with that as our working hypothesis.... but how then do we explain the second "2" ... it seems plausible that event 1 (the swap) creates event 2 (the "2").

If you could find other examples of late dot43/44 rifles with mismatched rear sight components that were very close in serial to the rifle, which also had the "2" marking, you might convince me and others. So you have a research project now!
 
If you could find other examples of late dot43/44 rifles with mismatched rear sight components that were very close in serial to the rifle, which also had the "2" marking, you might convince me and others. So you have a research project now!

We do have one data point, and agree that we need to find another data point to increase our degrees-of-freedom. It gives us all something to look for. The "2" is anomalous, and have never observed that on the many dots I have owned w/ a matched rear sight. Similarly, have never observed a numbers mm rear sight on a dot before.
 
A much more mundane idea but could it be that the “2” was woefully misstamped on the first try? Lol
 
Are there any antecedents to the '2' shown on Vz.24 rear sight blades? Just wondering if this is an example of carry-over, but for a (still) unknown reason.

Pat
 
Have to wonder if it might be a marking to denote what end of the tolerance spectrum it might be for elevation purposes. Kind of like front sight blades have a numbered height marking on the bottom.
 
Have to wonder if it might be a marking to denote what end of the tolerance spectrum it might be for elevation purposes. Kind of like front sight blades have a numbered height marking on the bottom.

I looked at about ten dot 1943/4s this morning and all have the correct sn, and nothing else on that base plate. It's period done... but related to the sight swap?? Could be others out there to find, but likely a needle in the 'stack. Whatever it represents, the combo is worth noting...
 
I was thinking more along the lines of after it was initially test fired (on the original rifle) it may have been marked for a noted difference, all just a guess. I will definitely keep it in mind in the future, there’s no way I’ve studied half as many Brünn rifles as you that’s for sure! I love looking at all these little details :thumbsup:
 
.... Is it possible the "2" indicates it's replaced? I guess, but that isn't the usual mechanism for replaced components.

Maybe some progress on this? An astute forum member pointed me to pg 654 of your vol 2B book that shows a 33/40 with a "2" stamped top dead center... and the text states "This particular rifle was reworked during the war, and at that time the "2" was added to the receiver...." Of course, the 2 on the receiver is not there on a traditionally assembled 945, 33/40.

Same rifle is shown here, I think...

http://www.k98kforum.com/showthread.php?18693-G-33-40-945-1940-HZa-rework&highlight=rework
 

Attachments

  • 945.dot.2.jpg
    945.dot.2.jpg
    156.2 KB · Views: 40
Last edited:

Military Rifle Journal
Back
Top