Third Party Press
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 11

Thread: ce 43: Factory correct, Depot correct, or Post War alter?

  1. #1
    Member DiehardWWII's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Alabama,US
    Posts
    46

    Default ce 43: Factory correct, Depot correct, or Post War alter?

    Hello,
    I have a ce43 for your review. The metal is all matched aside from a replacement safety. Firing pin not shown but matched. The stock is 359 proofed twice as is the receiver once on the side. I see no other numbered proof on the receiver above the "ce" just the eagle. The handguard is marked with the gun serial and has some waff on the outside. The stock and handguard seem to be a perfect match in color and at the front where the stain/non stain areas match. The stock seems to be unnumbered inside but I will try some more magnification later tonight. No army "H" or other markings that I can see other than the two 359 buttplate markings. The bayonet lug looks well attached and fit very well but looks somewhat odd to have so much blue (in contrast to the typical faded Sauer bluing elsewhere). It has a proof at the front which is either 77 or 37 but I am leaning toward 77 but not totally clear. What did I buy? I know 359 stocks are known to be replacements so I thought it may be period. Let me know your thoughts at thanks in advance.
    Diehard
    Attached Images Attached Images

  2. #2
    Member DiehardWWII's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Alabama,US
    Posts
    46

    Default more pics

    Here's more.
    Attached Images Attached Images

  3. #3
    Member DiehardWWII's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Alabama,US
    Posts
    46

    Default more

    Please request anything else you need to see.
    Thanks
    Attached Images Attached Images

  4. #4
    Baby Face RyanE's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    AL
    Posts
    1,603

    Default

    Looks like an armorer's spare stock and handguard to me, though most have only one Waa359 with flat buttplates. Assuming the swap was period, it was almost certainly a field level replacement. The stock was damaged and replaced in the field out of the local armorer's chest. There was a similar 42 1940 posted on GB similar to yours (replacement stock, no depot inspections, no numbers, etc) with shrapnel damage under the woodline. No way to prove it of course.

    Nice ce43! Replaced safety doesn't bother me a bit.

  5. #5
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Central AL
    Posts
    372

    Default

    43 Sauer should have an E/H on the right side of the stock and would not have a subcontracted buttplate on it. The two Eagle 359 markings on the keel look like modern reproduction and more recently struck. There is steel wool damage to the back of the receiver bridge. The stock looks nice otherwise. I would not expect any stock to be inspected by the 359 team anyway. The only parts I've seen E/WaA 359 on are receivers and assorted small parts like the rear sight bases/components.
    Last edited by D-K; 07-13-2013 at 10:50 PM.

  6. #6
    Member DiehardWWII's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Alabama,US
    Posts
    46

    Default 359 stock

    I have a bnz 43 with a 359 stock which experts here said was likely made with it due to proper stock numbering. The stock could almost be this ones twin so I was less concerned about the stocks authenticity and more concerned with how it fits with this sauer rifles story.
    Thanks
    Diehard

  7. #7
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Central AL
    Posts
    372

    Default

    I have rarely seen armorer spare stocks--the few I have seen are "S/42" marked on the keel. I am also not aware of Kar98k stocks being made/inspected at Walther, where the 359 team was located. Why is there not a WaA in front of the 359 on the stamps on your keel? I admit this just may be a collecting area I am not familiar with, and look forward to the discussion on this to clear up my lack of understanding.

  8. #8
    Baby Face RyanE's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    AL
    Posts
    1,603

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by D-K View Post
    I have rarely seen armorer spare stocks--the few I have seen are "S/42" marked on the keel. I am also not aware of Kar98k stocks being made/inspected at Walther, where the 359 team was located. Why is there not a WaA in front of the 359 on the stamps on your keel? I admit this just may be a collecting area I am not familiar with, and look forward to the discussion on this to clear up my lack of understanding.
    FWIW, I have seen far more WaA359 armorer stocks than S/42 or byf spares. My depot repair has one. Remember, WaA359 does not necessarily mean Walther made or inspected the stock. The 359 inspection team covered the all of Zella-Mehlis and probably surrounding areas as well.

    Another example 359 spare (and more readable than mine) from BiO: http://www.k98kforum.com/showthread....p-WaA359-Stock
    Attached Images Attached Images

  9. #9
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Central AL
    Posts
    372

    Default

    Thank you. I was not familiar with that marking or those facts.

  10. #10
    Senior Member Turbo Archie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    1,658

    Default

    That is an incredible gun.

    I have a stock just like that.









    ..
    *
    **--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    **Wanted - Original un-dicked with late Steyr (bnz45) stock... Long shot but......
    ** --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    **

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •