Late dual lug ac45 with ZF4

A local friend of mine recently sold one of his rifles. He told me he centuries ago got these in a trade from a Museum in Belgium, I even got shown the import permit from back then, they indeed confirmed this item originates from a museum. Anyway, the rifle itself is all matching and is a dual lug ac45 in the c-Block. It is basically unissued, or at least doesn't look to have seen a lot of action.

There is a virtual ton of phosphate items on this rifle, more than blued ones. Even the magazine has phosphate parts. Now to the question: the pictured ZF4 scope mount that is 359 accepted, but has no rifle number on it. Is this one correct for this rifle (if no, at which letter block do unnumbered rifle mounts start to appear)? Were scope mounts without rifle numbers on them issued late in the war, or were the unnumbered mounts captured items at the production facility?

Nice pictures, beautiful. late march but no reverse stamped.

A very fine example, much like but nicer (the stock) than my own d block ac45. Same features regarding the phosphate. As far as the mount I’ll let those more knowledgeable about the mounts than myself answer your questions. For what it’s worth, I have an unnumbered original mount myself and they tend to stir up controversy and varying opinions on the whys and why nots. Yes, they do exist but expect some controversy about it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I didn't know there was a controversy. Walther numbered scope mounts until the end of production. There are d block rifles proving this.

Georg, most unnumbered mounts were likely captured at the factory waiting to be fitted to rifles. Some were supposedly sent to depots to be used as replacements. These "field numbered" mounts will have a faint numbered applied by electric pencil (or something similar). Unnumbered mounts are super desirable but I wouldn't call them "correct" as the only correct G/K43 mount is one that is numbered to the rifle. Unnumbered is still mismatch. Unfortunately that is the tough part about G43 snipers, without the matching mount it is impossible to say whether it is truly a sniper or not.

Nice rifle and mount. Congrats and thanks for sharing pictures.

mdarnell19 said:

I didn't know there was a controversy. Walther numbered scope mounts until the end of production. There are d block rifles proving this.

Georg, most unnumbered mounts were likely captured at the factory waiting to be fitted to rifles. Some were supposedly sent to depots to be used as replacements. These "field numbered" mounts will have a faint numbered applied by electric pencil (or something similar). Unnumbered mounts are super desirable but I wouldn't call them "correct" as the only correct G/K43 mount is one that is numbered to the rifle. Unnumbered is still mismatch. Unfortunately that is the tough part about G43 snipers, without the matching mount it is impossible to say whether it is truly a sniper or not.

Nice rifle and mount. Congrats and thanks for sharing pictures.

View attachment 249208View attachment 249209

Click to expand...

I never get tired of looking at Jacks d block.

Thanks for the replies! So unless the rifle was captured at the factory with the non-serialized scope mount on it, it is unlikely then. I'll nevertheless keep it this way, better than no scope on it.

Very nice piece, thanks for sharing!

sturmgrenadier said:

I never get tired of looking at Jacks d block.

Click to expand...

I never tire of seeing any G43 snipers. Yours is awesome also!

Georg, yes I would leave the scope mount on there. They look super cool and unnumbered mounts are harder to find and neat.

Really nice rifle! I’ve also heard (or maybe read) that the unnumbered mounts could also be armorer’s replacements. I can’t cite that right now where that could be anywhere though. An unnumbered mount like that which shows no signs of tampering is just under having a matching numbered scope mount. It’s the next best thing. On a side note, I have a really nice 1937 P.08 Luger with a correct matching mag. I bought a correct unnumbered armorer’s replacement mag for the 2nd mag. So, kind of the same thing here. It’s the next best thing and something that could have been done and not inaccurate.

Several neat things going on with your rifle:

Stock has no side e/359 final proof. And, it looks to have never had one as the wood mill marks are all there where that stamp would be. (At least I couldn’t see one on there. My eyes are getting silly here lately.)

Unnumbered scope mount. It’s pretty desirable as mentioned above.

acw mag. Those aren’t too common either!

Odd and neat that it has the automatic type dust cover that late. Almost all of them have the manual type by this late time frame.

First report of this rifle in my serial number database. Thank you for sharing.

I couldn't see any side stamps either with that rifle. But since it has the proofs on bottom, I thought it would be OK and didn't additionally bother on the side stamps. So maybe this one could really be captured at factory where it was set up as sniper rifle and took home as souvenir, without the final proof on the side and without a rifle serial on the mount?
Thanks also for pointing out the automatic sliding dust cover. I did notice it, but didn't notice it was unique for this late. Still a lot on the G/K.43 rifles that I yet have to learn!

Maybe Darrin will give a few answers in his upcoming book. Looking forward to get mine!

Absolut said:

Thanks for the replies! So unless the rifle was captured at the factory with the non-serialized scope mount on it, it is unlikely then. I'll nevertheless keep it this way, better than no scope on it.

Click to expand...

Any photos of the other side mount ? was curious of the scope that was in it.. This is the last variant mount with all phosphate parts. I would expect a super late k43 marked ddx in there.

Absolut said:

I couldn't see any side stamps either with that rifle. But since it has the proofs on bottom, I thought it would be OK and didn't additionally bother on the side stamps. So maybe this one could really be captured at factory where it was set up as sniper rifle and took home as souvenir, without the final proof on the side and without a rifle serial on the mount?
Thanks also for pointing out the automatic sliding dust cover. I did notice it, but didn't notice it was unique for this late. Still a lot on the G/K.43 rifles that I yet have to learn!

Maybe Darrin will give a few answers in his upcoming book. Looking forward to get mine!

Click to expand...

Can’t wait to get my copy of that book as well. That rifle looks correct and good to go. I have one without the side stock proof also but the mill marks are there where the stamp would have gone, like this one looks to have.

I have ac45 K43 5599c. It's in original factory fresh condition, reportedly taken as a souvenir when the Walther plant was "liberated". It is identical to this one in all respects except it has no proof marks on the barrel or receiver and no inspection, acceptance stamps, or serial number in the wood. Besides the obvious features, these very late Walther made K43s have product improvements not made by other contractors. These include a relocated recoil lug, dual bolt guide lugs, stainless steel gas piston, adjustable trigger, and a pair of 3mm holes in the gas cylinder that bled off gas and reduced the violence of cycling. There were other minor changes, too. IIRC, the c block was the last complete block made by Walther, with guns produced from the d block before production ceased altogether.

That's not to say that some of these features are not encountered on earlier guns. The late Walther guns had all of them.

The stock on the OP's gun has not been refinished. I believe that originally it was quite smooth, and very blonde in color, as mine is. Some late war stocks lack the heavy chatter.

The "automatic" dust cover was common at this stage of production. Mine has it, too, but I think it might be installed backwards on the OP's gun. It opened when the gun fired, but did not reciprocate with the bolt. The curled metal thumb tab should be towards the rear?

K43s produced this late can have nearly all phosphate components, or be nearly all blued, or any combination in between. The blue is generally not of very high quality on the recoil spring housing and bolt cover, with reddish or purple blotches here and there.

I think it important to remember that not all K43s left their factories with Zf-4 mounts, as not all were intended for use by sharpshooters. Some rifles were not up to accuracy standards and had the mount rail milled off of the receivers.

buick8 said:

Any photos of the other side mount ? was curious of the scope that was in it.. This is the last variant mount with all phosphate parts. I would expect a super late k43 marked ddx in there.

Click to expand...

Sorry, took me some time to reply. It carries a dow coded ZF4, as far as I remember it is 37.8XX serialized. Was consistant with Claus Espeholts list when I checked it back then, he lists them with WaA359 mounts, plus two 39.XXX serial dow scopes with mounts matching to ac45 d-Block rifles.

Thanks for posting this nice rifle and to all for the discussion. Look forward to my books coming too.

My a block has very little stock finish and this rifle has quite a bit of stain and/or varnish. I assume that is not unusal?

Matt, I think you are right about matching numbered mount is the best evidence a given rifle was originally a sniper, even though the original concept was to scope all them and have them as a DM rifle. I wonder if they continued that effort or just put them out with scopes when they had enough optics packages.?? Anyway, my duv 44 had the distinct markings it had a scope at some point and I got it from the Vet's son. They did not add one, I feel sure. The duffle cut repair was 4 holes in the stock and tie the duffle cut together with a GI boot string. This had to be about 1982. I am PO at myself for a poor duffle cut repair, should have left the boot strings. My A block AC 45 also has had a scope on it but very possibly post WW2, no way to know. To me, at least on the AC 44 Walther I consider those marks to be Evidence, not conclusive by any means, that it had a scope quite possibly out the door. At least I can dream that it did anyway.

I need a shooter's kit for the 44 rifle. Shot it 35 years ago but not since.