Takedown disk size, Erma, 38-40

[waw44]

What is the story on takedown disks? In the picture reference the 38 Erma has laminated stock and smaller diameter takedown disk, while the 39 Erma has a laminated stock and larger disk. The 1940 code 27 Erma again has the larger disk, but the matching although sportered 39 I bought recently has the smaller disk. Was this just different stock suppliers?

 

[swjXE]

I looked the 1939 Erma in the pic. reference index and I think it's showing a large photo of the small 25mm disc. As for your sporter, What are the proofs on the stock? Are you sure it's not a Armorer's replacement stock?

 

[waw44]

Nope. My sporter was all matching Waa280 proofed rifle, code 27 , 1939. Small takedown disk in a laminate stock. I have it in a Waa77 walnut stock now.




The 1939 Luftwaffe contract rifle in the reference library has the larger disk, laminate stock. https://www.k98kforum.com/threads/1939-27-luftwaffe-contract.37598/

This 39 Erma is in a walnut stock, smaller disk: https://pre98.com/shop/german-ww2-rare-erma-27-code-1939-mauser-k98k-rifle-matching-sharp-example/

1940 code 27 rifle, larger disk , laminate stock: https://www.k98kforum.com/threads/erma-27-1940.42579/

 

[swjXE]

You're absolutely correct! That's what I get for looking at photos without my glasses on. Wow that Erma 1939 with the large discs and yet a flat buttplate seems really weird for 1939 but not for 1940. I don't believe it would be impossible for it to be a 1939 receiver assembled in 1940 since a "K" block is pretty late.

 

[mowzerluvr]

I have a small stack of replacement larger discs. No tubes, just the discs. I often wonder about manufacturer disc use.

 

[waw44]

You're absolutely correct! That's what I get for looking at photos without my glasses on. Wow that Erma 1939 with the large discs and yet a flat buttplate seems really weird for 1939 but not for 1940. I don't believe it would be impossible for it to be a 1939 receiver assembled in 1940 since a "K" block is pretty late.

To add detail, my rifle is a d series, so in H1 of 39. Do we know why the change in takedown disk? Supplier change?

 

[swjXE]

To add detail, my rifle is a d series, so in H1 of 39. Do we know why the change in takedown disk? Supplier change?

I believe the orders to switch to the cupped buttplate, large discs and 12" cleaning rod came out in 1940 and most manufacturers attempted to follow them and to a large degree succeeded and yet Sauer kept the small disc, except for a very few rifles, mostly those assembled by Sauer with bcd receivers in late 44. It looks like Erma gave thought to complying, but perhaps because they were phasing out k98 production were ordered to just use up the parts they had on hand.

 

[swjXE]

I have a small stack of replacement larger discs. No tubes, just the discs. I often wonder about manufacturer disc use.

Dave, PM sent.

 

[Tom H]

The OP's question made me curious enough to go pull out my '39 ERMA. It has a large disc. K block just like Jordan's.

Does anyone else think pre98's stock is wanked? The acceptances look wrong for ERMA.

First pic is my rifle, second pic is Pre98's rifle.

 

[heavy_mech]

FWIW to this discussion my 1940 27 code e block (3642) is a flat butt plate large disc variety.

 

[waw44]

The OP's question made me curious enough to go pull out my '39 ERMA. It has a large disc. K block just like Jordan's.

Does anyone else think pre98's stock is wanked? The acceptances look wrong for ERMA.

First pic is my rifle, second pic is Pre98's rifle.

I'm probably the least knowledgeable here, but Here is the acceptance from my d block, 95## serial , 1939 Erma. The pre98 rifle is also a d block, but a 2### serial.

 

[swjXE]

The OP's question made me curious enough to go pull out my '39 ERMA. It has a large disc. K block just like Jordan's.

Does anyone else think pre98's stock is wanked? The acceptances look wrong for ERMA.

First pic is my rifle, second pic is Pre98's rifle.

Yes, the stock is totally wanked!