Bought the weapon, not the story, still curious though.

Sexton

Sexton

Member
Gentlemen,
Is there any truth to a statement I heard that different manufacturers were assigned to specific groups or units?
I came across this 147 code at a show a while ago. All numbers match, bluing isn't bad, wood was a little dry. The only thing that bothered me was the upper band and sling were on the wrong side. I was thinking it was a duffel cut that got put back together wrong, so I asked the seller if it was in fact, cut. He said "No, it wasn't cut, an American officer brought it back from Africa, all the Sauer's went to the DAK, bla bla bla..." He couldn't explain why the band and sling were on wrong though and that was the only concern I had, and was ready to take it home at "No".
Opinions?
 
Nahh, they got shipped where they were needed. Not manufacturer/unit sensitive.
 
Sexton said:
Thanks, I figured as much. Not sure the DAK even existed when this one came off the assembly line in '37.

Warrior 1354: south of 900.
Click to expand...



A 1937 rifle could have been used by DAK. They could have been supplied with rifles of any date up to 1941 or maybe a few in 1942 before their supply chain was severely disrupted.
There have been some posts on possible DAK rifles here before. Do a search for Afrika Korps, or commonwealth captured rifles.
 
Loewe could really give you the best data on this, but I think it’s safe to say that no one manufacturer sent all their production to any one location. Now it IS true that certain codes and year’s show up most often as “Russian captures” which tells us that these were predominantly sent eastward, and it’s easy to imagine that for expediency makers closer to the eastern front might have had the bulk of their production sent there, but there is no truth to any one maker exclusively supplying any group or theater.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top