Rg34 arr42

[Frysk]

Hello all,
Bought this yesterday, i like to share.
Spoon didn’t came with the box, i added it myself (Believing it to be correct)


All arr cans collected so far are waa57 and in the same dark green paint.
Did waa57 also come in the grey and yellow paint or did each waa have it’s own(different) paint?
Also, is it common for arr4(4) kits to have the spoon missing? And what spoon would be correct to add?
Would like to hear from you,
Kind regards,
J

 

[dot]

Simple questions but somewhat complex answers, especially when we lack much information about the manufacture of the Rg34 during the war.

IMHO and to the best of my knowledge, the Braunsweigische Blechwarenfabrik firm started manufacturing Rg34 cans in 1941 supplying them to other manufacturers, while also assembling complete kits, in part using subcontracted parts. Starting from this premise, the kits marked with the Waffenamt WaA57 indicates that they were assembled by the Aktien-Maschinenfabrik Kyffhäuserhütte firm using cans supplied by Braunsweigische Blechwarenfabrik.

With regard to your questions,

All arr cans collected so far are waa57 and in the same dark green paint.

No, in the arr kits you can observe different Waffenamts, depending on which firm was the one that assembled it; and the cans present some shades of lacquer, many times difficult to differentiate.

Did waa57 also come in the grey and yellow paint or did each waa have it’s own(different) paint?

Personally, I have not observed any yellow/tan kit with the WaA57. Note that sometime in 1944 the practice of stamping the Waffenamt on the finished Rg34s ceased in the case of arr/rco kits.
Regarding the lacquer finish, everything indicates that the cans were delivered already painted by Braunsweigische Blechwarenfabrik to the other firms.

Also, is it common for arr4(4) kits to have the spoon missing?

No, everything indicates that all the Rg34s left the factory with the HKW inside.

And what spoon would be correct to add?

It depends on the firm that did the final assembly of the Rg34, you would have to find out first.

Antoni

 

[CanadianAR]

Very nice kit!! Looks correct to me.

 

[Frysk]

No, in the arr kits you can observe different Waffenamts, depending on which firm was the one that assembled it; and the cans present some shades of lacquer, many times difficult to differentiate.


Personally, I have not observed any yellow/tan kit with the WaA57. Note that sometime in 1944 the practice of stamping the Waffenamt on the finished Rg34s ceased in the case of arr/rco kits.
Regarding the lacquer finish, everything indicates that the cans were delivered already painted by Braunsweigische Blechwarenfabrik to the other firms.

Hello Antoni,
Thanks for your response!
Still allot to learn i guess..

 

[Frysk]

Very nice kit!! Looks correct to me.

Thank you!

 

[Slash]

Personally, I have not observed any yellow/tan kit with the WaA57. Note that sometime in 1944 the practice of stamping the Waffenamt on the finished Rg34s ceased in the case of arr/rco kits.

Antoni

Personally, I have never observed a Braunschweigische Blechwarenfabrik made behälter in original period yellow/tan paint with ANY WaA stamping. The last of the Braunschweigische cans in Blue/Green/Gray paint (before the transition to yellow/tan) are also without WaA markings of any type.

 

[dot]

Personally, I have never observed a Braunschweigische Blechwarenfabrik made behälter in original period yellow/tan paint with ANY WaA stamping.

Here's an example... https://www.k98kforum.com/threads/tan-arr43-cleaning-kits.5495/

Antoni

 

[CanadianAR]

Here's an example... https://www.k98kforum.com/threads/tan-arr43-cleaning-kits.5495/

Antoni

One with corrosion would likely be a period overpaint to me. Painted over latches.

 

[Slash]

Here's an example... https://www.k98kforum.com/threads/tan-arr43-cleaning-kits.5495/ Antoni

I am familiar with these kits and stand by my original assertion. I do not believe these (and other arr43 behälter) to be in original factory yellow/tan paint. The second kit is clearly overpainted as the color is not consistent and the latches are painted. Braunschweigische Blechwarenfabrik did not paint their latches. I believe the first can to be overpainted as well. Unknown when; perhaps period, perhaps not. There are many examples of yellow/tan overpainted cans by other makers as well. Just in my own collection I have pieces by Appel, Hawig, and Mundlos. Have many others recorded in other collections as well. All early cans (some even tinned) overpainted in yellow/tan. Some are probably period refurbishments; others may have been field repainted for Tropical usage; others, who knows. In my opinions, the factory painted cans in yellow/tan are exclusive to Braunschweigische Blechwarenfabrik and started in late 1944. The only possible exception to these comments are the unknown maker rbl44 marked cans. The rbl44 cans are very rare with only a few reported - including a single example in yellow/tan paint by a member of this forum. Not sure on this paint as factory original either without further pics or information.

 

[Nigromontanus]

tan cleaning kits have no WaA. As for the HKW, I do not agree with dot. I believe and have observed that many later kits were not issued with one. Reason: K43 and MP44 do not need one

 

[dot]

tan cleaning kits have no WaA. As for the HKW, I do not agree with dot. I believe and have observed that many later kits were not issued with one. Reason: K43 and MP44 do not need one

Hi Nigromontanus,
In the first statement you are right (except for an arr43 kit, although it seems just a rarity), but in the second statement you are completely wrong, all the evidences indicates that all the Rg34s left the factory with the HKW inside. There is no known instruction or order that indicates the non-incorporation of the tool or the authorization of its withdrawal by the troops. The fact that that most of the kits that appear today do not carry the HKW is another matter...

Antoni

 

[Nigromontanus]

I do not know which evidence you are referring to. I can just say that I have aquired more than 1000 of these in the last 10 years and that untouched ones from 1944 very often lacked the HKW, in such a siginficant number, that I could not resist not seeing a pattern.

Slash may be ever more educated on these and could give his opinion too.

 

[Nigromontanus]

As for the tan rbl mentioned above, does anyone have good photos of this one? I have 2 in the collection and 5 in the photo database, all blue.

 

[Nigromontanus]

By the way, has anyone ever found this brush in a RG34?

 

[Frysk]

Where do you have this picture from if i may ask?
There is a brush for sale on the internet that looks like the one in the picture.
But the seller claims it is a brush for the mp40.

 

[CanadianAR]

tan cleaning kits have no WaA. As for the HKW, I do not agree with dot. I believe and have observed that many later kits were not issued with one. Reason: K43 and MP44 do not need one

A k43 and others could still benefit from the chamber cleaner end. The floor plate part would be useless obviously

 

[Nigromontanus]

It is a scan from a manual. As for these being for sale, there are postwar brushes from the Bulgarians on the market. Maybe you can send me a link for the offer.

 

[Slash]

tan cleaning kits have no WaA. As for the HKW, I do not agree with dot. I believe and have observed that many later kits were not issued with one.

Stated the same thing earlier in this thread. There are no factory painted tan/yellow cans with WaA. The late war progression of changes in the Braunschweigisch rg34 is quite clear as far as when the tan/yellow painted cans were introduced.

Hi Nigromontanus,
In the first statement you are right (except for an arr43 kit, although it seems just a rarity), but in the second statement you are completely wrong, all the evidences indicates that all the Rg34s left the factory with the HKW inside. There is no known instruction or order that indicates the non-incorporation of the tool or the authorization of its withdrawal by the troops. The fact that that most of the kits that appear today do not carry the HKW is another matter...
Antoni

As already noted, the arr43 cans in question are overpainted. Perhaps period but not originally issued in that color. No different than other older cans observed that were refurbished in tan/yellow paint.

I do not know which evidence you are referring to. I can just say that I have aquired more than 1000 of these in the last 10 years and that untouched ones from 1944 very often lacked the HKW, in such a siginficant number, that I could not resist not seeing a pattern.

Slash may be ever more educated on these and could give his opinion too.

Just saw the additions to this thread. In my opinion it is clear that all cans were NOT originally issued with HKW. My experiences are similar to those stated by Nigromontanus. I have owned a like amount of kits as well as personally examined several hundred additional examples in other collections. And with additional research have compiled spreadsheets with several thousand cleaning kits and their contents described in great detail. There is a statistically significant decline in HKW as present in rg34 beginning in late 1943. This is noted to some extent with all makers. Going into 1944 and after there is an even greater decline in the percentage of untouched examples with HKW. Massive amounts of late war material was brought back to the States by US servicemen. Many of these items were depot captured or otherwise unissued. There are scores of examples of late war firearms and bayonets in this type of condition shown here on the forum. Cleaning kits were/are no different. It is quite easy to identify rg34 that were unused or unissued and untampered with. On more than one occasion I have purchased more than one kit from the same source in identical, unissued condition. Upon examining enough examples especially 1944 into '45 dated, a pattern can clearly be identified of cans containing like or identical components but lacking the HKW. I do not think there was a blanket decision or order to cease including the HKW. Some late war kits were obviously issued with the HKW as shown in the spreadsheets and other observations, but not all. In my findings the later the kit, the less likely it was issued with a HKW until those that are so documented are in fact the minority. Another observation is the number of extant "early" HKW documented compared to the later patterns (marked or otherwise). There are many more early and mid-war HKW to be found or observed than the later patterns. This seems counter intuitive. The earlier components should be harder to find. Lost, damaged, discarded, or destroyed. To make an analogy, it is very hard to find pre-war dated S84/98 bayonets that have not been tampered with or refurbished. Much easer to find an untouched '44 date. No such trouble in locating pre-war dated HKW. Much easier to find an early or mid-war HKW than a late version, especially a maker/dated marked example. I could go on, but will refrain. My thought only .....

 

[dot]

I think that the purpose and usefulness of the HKW, which many collectors refer to as a spoon, is undervalued today.
Without a doubt, not including the HKW could be a saving measure towards the end of the war but considering that the k98 was very present also towards the end, would it compensate such saving with the possible inconveniences? If I don't have the tool, do I use a live cartridge tip to remove the floorpalte or clean the Hulsenkopf with my fingers or with another tool at the risk of damaging it?
If some Rg34s left the factory without the HKW, the logical thing would be to indicate it on the can in some way so that it would not be assigned to a soldier with a type 98 weapon.
As for the evidences, I have also checked quite a few kits, and the conclusion I have reached is the opposite, although it is only the opinion of a researcher and enthusiast about this subject.

Antoni