S/42G recoil lug

[jimdvan]

Tonight I got to looking at my S/42G bolt mm and noticed the recoil lug waffenamt is different than the rest of the gun. Where most waffenamts are a mix of e/63 & e/211 the recoul lug is e/221 f and the nut is marked B.

Is it possible the recoil lug was replaced at some point?

 

[heavy_mech]

Its a moderately early Heimag recoil lug but it's later than the rifle IMHO. Beyond that probably need more detailed photos of everything you can see.

 

[jimdvan]

I also just noticed the butt plate appears to be e/46 and the serial number and q suffix match the rifle.

 

[jimdvan]

Its a moderately early Heimag recoil lug but it's later than the rifle IMHO. Beyond that probably need more detailed photos of everything you can see.

I was also thinking it was later than my gun. In "Backbone"
Law lists a 1939 BSW with an e/221 recoil lug.

It could be the original broke under recoil.

 

[jimdvan]

On one list e/221 f is Karl Heise.

 

[mrfarb]

Sounds like the stock metal from a 337 1939.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[jimdvan]

Sounds like the stock metal from a 337 1939.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Well, all the stock metal serial numbers and waffenamts match the rest of the gun except the 221 f lug and the e/46 on the butt plate. The serial number font on the butt plate is the same as the rest of the gun.

The wood is e/63 marked and the take-down disks are e/211.

 

[mrfarb]

Post a few pics of the buttplate, might be cool to see.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[heavy_mech]

Could that recoil lug be a legit anomaly?

 

[heavy_mech]

On one list e/221 f is Karl Heise.

Yes correct. 'Heimag' is Karl Heise, Maschinenbau GmbH

 

[mowzerluvr]

Droop e/46 is correct for a very short period mid-year on G dates. I had one and a friend had one with several parts with droop e/46's, bands, butt plates and t-guard assemblies come to mind. However the "stick" e/46 is of 337/1939 period. Your recoil lug sounds like 337/39 or 40'.

 

[jimdvan]

Sorry for the sidways photos, they look correct on my phone.

 

[CanadianAR]

I think the lug was replaced. That’s not a waffenamt stamp you’d see in 1935.

 

[jimdvan]

I think the lug was replaced. That’s not a waffenamt stamp you’d see in 1935.

My thought as well.