Bnz 42
- Thread starter toulon44
- Start date
Last edited:
I will post some more photos of the stock tomorrow. No serials on the stock, but there's a "dot" on the forend, top center, and another on the butt, about 3" above the toe. Also what looks to be a "Z" and a "0" just above the toe. Buttplate is "brg" marked. Stock and forend matches, with "6191" in the barrel channel and the underside of the forend. I've been told the stock may have been sanded, but I don't think so. I'll need someone more versed than I to look at it. Still a nice rifle.
Bob
toulon44
Senior Member
yes the buttplate a gqm subcontracted and the stock is internally sérialed , i add some pics and one of the barrel's code .
the buttplate
handguard and stock sérial
barrel 41 dated
Very helpful, gqm buttplates are less common, brg most common, at least so far. Unmarked are rare, but they are probably Döbeln made (bpr-brg), just not marked externally. For whatever reason some Döbeln made were only marked internally. Not sure if SDP made their own. Barrel is right for this range, several just like it all around it.
SDP is probably the trickiest of the makers to trend, no other firms production overlaps as much, characteristics common earlier can linger on intermittently well into following blocks. This and the fact the company postwar reports on production did not match up with known ranges (it was clear rifles marked earlier were in the following years totals), wildly off, made me think SDP had problems with rifles being accepted. Wolfgang was able to confirm this later in the archives, so this is all normal for the company. SDP's company structure and production was so disparate from all the others, only Gustloff-Werke remotely similar, that it stands alone when you study their activities. A perfect example of NS theory meeting reality, - inept, wasteful and destructive all at once. Kind of like our government...
SDP is probably the trickiest of the makers to trend, no other firms production overlaps as much, characteristics common earlier can linger on intermittently well into following blocks. This and the fact the company postwar reports on production did not match up with known ranges (it was clear rifles marked earlier were in the following years totals), wildly off, made me think SDP had problems with rifles being accepted. Wolfgang was able to confirm this later in the archives, so this is all normal for the company. SDP's company structure and production was so disparate from all the others, only Gustloff-Werke remotely similar, that it stands alone when you study their activities. A perfect example of NS theory meeting reality, - inept, wasteful and destructive all at once. Kind of like our government...
Thanks for the clarification, 6191 c, recently (February) put up on one of the forums? I didn't save the text, nor the stock in the trends as it was not pictured well enough for inclusion, but this is helpful. It did look like a nice rifle, stocks are difficult to judge in pictures, it is best to have it in hand for light sanding. Luckily being in Texas, you have no shortage of informed collectors to help (of course it is a big state!).
I think that was mine (same rifle), in one of my first posts. Still learning about my rifle; this place has taught me a lot. The journey continues...
Bob
I can't say I have studied this feature is detail, the internal dating of stock, to determine if these markings are related to SDP made stocks or just Brno made, a quick glace at a few in the b-d ranges the marking, both in style and form does fit other dot-stocks in the bnz/42 ranges. All others are "41" dated, though yours looks "43" I would caution against jumping to any certainty regarding this scribble being determinative regarding authenticity.
Typically, I place little value in these scribbled dates and or codes, for one they are often crude and difficult to interpret, but I do note the general application of these codes/dates (apparently) and other than your assumed year date appears to be a 43 (and all others, about 5-6) are 41 plus what looks like a Ku or some other undefined set of letters.
Really, your rifle does fit trends, has the right markings and characteristics fit the range. This "apparent" abnormality should be noted but isn't (alone) enough to condemn or question the rifles authenticity.
*** it would be helpful if those with rifles in the bnz/41 h-block through c-block of 1942 (bnz) examine the internals of their "matching" stocks. This is the range where most dot stocks fall in, though quite a few exist outside of this range, especially G.29/40's, it would be helpful to determine whether this is a dot application or SDP and whether the codes and date changes.. I will see if I can browse these ranges to see what patterns form, - mostly to see if this coding/dating is on SDP made as well (probably is) but I can't go by trends as I do not save data-trends based upon scribble.
Typically, I place little value in these scribbled dates and or codes, for one they are often crude and difficult to interpret, but I do note the general application of these codes/dates (apparently) and other than your assumed year date appears to be a 43 (and all others, about 5-6) are 41 plus what looks like a Ku or some other undefined set of letters.
Really, your rifle does fit trends, has the right markings and characteristics fit the range. This "apparent" abnormality should be noted but isn't (alone) enough to condemn or question the rifles authenticity.
*** it would be helpful if those with rifles in the bnz/41 h-block through c-block of 1942 (bnz) examine the internals of their "matching" stocks. This is the range where most dot stocks fall in, though quite a few exist outside of this range, especially G.29/40's, it would be helpful to determine whether this is a dot application or SDP and whether the codes and date changes.. I will see if I can browse these ranges to see what patterns form, - mostly to see if this coding/dating is on SDP made as well (probably is) but I can't go by trends as I do not save data-trends based upon scribble.
