Third Party Press

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

DiehardWWII

Well-known member
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
 

Attachments

  • IMG_2466.jpg
    IMG_2466.jpg
    224.4 KB · Views: 85
  • IMG_2469.jpg
    IMG_2469.jpg
    209.3 KB · Views: 82
  • IMG_2473.jpg
    IMG_2473.jpg
    214.1 KB · Views: 80
  • IMG_2475.jpg
    IMG_2475.jpg
    209.8 KB · Views: 84
  • IMG_2477.jpg
    IMG_2477.jpg
    216.5 KB · Views: 75
  • IMG_2479.jpg
    IMG_2479.jpg
    210.5 KB · Views: 74
  • IMG_2480.jpg
    IMG_2480.jpg
    206.2 KB · Views: 77
  • IMG_2482.jpg
    IMG_2482.jpg
    148.8 KB · Views: 69
  • IMG_2484.jpg
    IMG_2484.jpg
    213.9 KB · Views: 70
  • IMG_2485.jpg
    IMG_2485.jpg
    198 KB · Views: 67
more pics

Here's more.
 

Attachments

  • IMG_2488.jpg
    IMG_2488.jpg
    178.7 KB · Views: 44
  • IMG_2490.jpg
    IMG_2490.jpg
    214.4 KB · Views: 47
  • IMG_2492.jpg
    IMG_2492.jpg
    225.1 KB · Views: 45
  • IMG_2494.jpg
    IMG_2494.jpg
    204.7 KB · Views: 60
  • IMG_2495.jpg
    IMG_2495.jpg
    203.1 KB · Views: 40
  • IMG_2497.jpg
    IMG_2497.jpg
    185.4 KB · Views: 55
  • IMG_2500.jpg
    IMG_2500.jpg
    204.9 KB · Views: 47
  • IMG_2501.jpg
    IMG_2501.jpg
    215.9 KB · Views: 43
  • IMG_2504.jpg
    IMG_2504.jpg
    221.6 KB · Views: 46
  • IMG_2505.jpg
    IMG_2505.jpg
    201.7 KB · Views: 46
more

Please request anything else you need to see.
Thanks
 

Attachments

  • IMG_2506.jpg
    IMG_2506.jpg
    199.7 KB · Views: 36
  • IMG_2509.jpg
    IMG_2509.jpg
    213.9 KB · Views: 39
  • IMG_2513.jpg
    IMG_2513.jpg
    201.4 KB · Views: 40
  • IMG_2514.jpg
    IMG_2514.jpg
    202.7 KB · Views: 37
  • IMG_2515.jpg
    IMG_2515.jpg
    216.7 KB · Views: 38
  • IMG_2516.jpg
    IMG_2516.jpg
    195 KB · Views: 31
  • IMG_2518.jpg
    IMG_2518.jpg
    231.1 KB · Views: 37
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. :thumbsup:
 
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:
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
 
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.
 
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.php?2355-Depot-Rifle-w-byf-41-amp-WaA359-Stock
 

Attachments

  • tn_Stock Serial.jpg
    tn_Stock Serial.jpg
    110.6 KB · Views: 53
The Walther e/359 stocks are not as common as byf or Menzel (C stocks) so far as I have seen, but they do show up often enough (other trenders obviously have different experiences). I wish I had recorded more, but the truth is I have not filed many examples. They have been recorded both e/359 x1 and more often e/359 x2, I am not sure why the difference (x1 or x2) but I think it might have to do with when it was made. Also to note this e/359 doesn't have the e/WaA359, while most I have recorded seem to, though I have seen datasheets and one other that is only e/359, without the WaA in front of the 359. I am not sure if this is related to time frame either, but would assume so if it is authentic.

In my database ce/43 have the Se/H in all cases, so far anyway, and this one would have originally. So it is a replacement stock imo. Also regarding Walther, and most assume it is Walther who made the stocks, - though as Ryan states e/359 is Z-M and covers many firms, as does e/37 which covers a lot of firms in Suhl, though not all. Waffenamts cover areas, not firms generally, - some waffenamts cover rather large areas, the Solingen "area" waffenamts can vary considerably as Wolfgang has shown me recently, even firms many miles away, like in Lüdenscheid.

Walther is known to have supplied several Kar.98k parts to JPS and the ordnance system (and made the G/K43), so it stands to reason that they made these stocks. But it is possible some other Z-M firm made stocks too.

Nice rifle too.
 

Military Rifle Journal
Back
Top