bcd 43 patchwork family

Hello from good old germany!

I own a few handguns and just bought my first rifle. I initially thought this one would become a shooter for some time for me and then I seel it again (paid 500 EUR bucks). But then I got excited by the K98k history started to dig a bit deeper. I found it interesting / funny that I bought (unknowingly) a "true german version" of that rifle family. Honestly, I was just looking for any kind of K98 at that time.

Much respect to this forum here by the way, lots of skilled people! I find e.g. the blueprints and the numbering section very helpful. I alread read many threads and start to fear that this grows into some kind of addiction if I keep moving at this speed...

Also a couple of "brother rifles" out here so I hope you can help me with some questions on my rifle's "identity crisis"...

Here is - what I think - I know so far - please correct me if I'm wrong:
- Gustloff Werke, assembled in '43
- serial number 1870bb - at least for a certain fraction of it
- Russian capture
- re-activated by Frankonia München in 5KF - may 2016
- nice sophisticated way of hand engraved serial numbering on the "loader" (Verschluß - please excuse missing vocabulary in terms of rifles!)

Here is what I would like to know:
- Do you think the 1870 on the stock is original?
- What is this strange numbering on the barrel? Is it simply a different serial number (ch 3H7810) or is it another reference?
- I understood the Gustloff plant in Weimar was a large assembler, not a big manufacturer and they got supplier parts from lots of different locations. Is it "ok" in that sense for this Karabiner that the bajonett hook is not blued?
- Is this rifle missing a "Kornschutz"? So the protector around the forward aiming point?
- Is the forward band the correct one or should it be the "H-shaped" one?
- Is a red extractor probably ok for Gustloff rifles?
- Last one: the cleaning rod does surely have its hole in the bajonett hook, but the stock doesnt have the acutal hole in it to accomodate the rod. Nevertheless, I read somewhere that the rods where anyway not used so much during the late war time any more and the Wehrmacht decided to provide something like a bore snake for cleaning to the soliders. So since my rifle is from '43, it might have already been manufactured with a "cost and time saving change" to not drill this hole anymore into the stock. Does that make sense or is my stock fake in the sense of being a replica?

THANK YOU for helping me to get some orientation!

Cheers,

Rülpsilon

the stock is off a dou or is a stock used by dou I should say. Has the post war added rear recoil lug also.. Its an RC anything goes

mauser99 said:

Has the post war added rear recoil lug also

Click to expand...

aah! Understood! I consider this as an improvement, since I am anyways not qualified for any same numbers. Could this probably also explain my cleaning rod theorie?

Russian capture k98ks are made up of parts from dozens of k98ks. Your stock and barraled receiver did not leave the factory together. From the sounds of it, you have a late 44 or early 45 dot/swp stock. They were not drilled for a cleaning rod.

The ch on your barrel tells us it came from occupied FN plant. The next sequence is the steel lot code for quality control purposes.

The red (or plum) color of the extractor is both common and normal. It happened because of the reaction of the bluing and steel composition or heat treatment.

thank you so much everyone for your valuable answers! I am glad that I could clarify some of my questions so quickly. And I seriously dont mind that the rifle is a composition of several other ones. Still, I am trying to make my "Frankenstein" historically genuine

Three questions remain open:
- is the upper band the correct one?
- should the bajonett hook be blued?
- should I have a protection for the front sight to be historically correct?

Thank you again!

The closed type 'speed milled' band is correct.
The bayonet lug is correct (not blued).
The front sight base is cut for a hood, so adding one if you choose to would be appropriate.

You have a bb block. Here's one from the next block cc to compare. https://www.k98kforum.com/threads/k98k-bcd-43-cc-block.36073/

heavy_mech said:

The closed type 'speed milled' band is correct.
The bayonet lug is correct (not blued).
The front sight base is cut for a hood, so adding one if you choose to would be appropriate.

You have a bb block. Here's one from the next block cc to compare. https://www.k98kforum.com/threads/k98k-bcd-43-cc-block.36073/

Click to expand...

HM, are you sure about the bayo lug color?
I know BSWs had white lugs, but I ‘believe’ that by ‘43, Gustloff was using ‘l’ made blued (or at least dark colored) bayo lugs. (like the one you referenced above) I have 2(3) bcd 43s, an x & a cc block with blued/dark lugs; my g block is a restored duffle cut & the front metal doesn’t match, but the lug with it is blued. In the thread you linked, Dave Elder aka mowzerluvr, mentions a cc block that he once had, I have it now. Dave thought my g block should have a white lug, but I ‘think’ I saw in The Books that it should be blued. A run through BSW/337/bcd rifles in the reference leads me to think that by 1940, 337 code rifles mostly had blued lugs, though it makes perfect sense that they used up any nos BSW in-the-white lugs they’d moved to Weimar from Suhl.

As you can see, I’m curious about this feature.

This afternoon, I learned a bit french vocabularies with my son. He listened to audio files repeatedly with desperation and must have felt like me, reading through Muncher's comment again and again and only understanding it very slowly. But now I got it Thanks for sharing your experience!

I must admit that I felt like I had to rework the rifle a bit. I took it all apart and cleaned the metal parts thoroughly with gun oil over probably a week now on daily basis. I polished the barrel and fixed some blueing every here and there. Then I applied oven cleaner to the stock and let it sit in foil two three times for some hours. Finally, I stained (?) the wood and applied linseed varnish to it. (Remember: it's a shooter, nothing "worth" for a collection as I understood). It looks much better to me now and the heavy stink that was on it is gone. Now "she" and I will have some fun at the range. I will post a picture of her, once her belt and the front sight hood I bought have arrived.

Here we go. Hope you guys like the result. I'll post another one with the belt and sight hood later.

Congratulations! Hope you enjoy it!

Muncher 1953 said:

HM, are you sure about the bayo lug color?
I know BSWs had white lugs, but I ‘believe’ that by ‘43, Gustloff was using ‘l’ made blued (or at least dark colored) bayo lugs. (like the one you referenced above) I have 2(3) bcd 43s, an x & a cc block with blued/dark lugs; my g block is a restored duffle cut & the front metal doesn’t match, but the lug with it is blued. In the thread you linked, Dave Elder aka mowzerluvr, mentions a cc block that he once had, I have it now. Dave thought my g block should have a white lug, but I ‘think’ I saw in The Books that it should be blued. A run through BSW/337/bcd rifles in the reference leads me to think that by 1940, 337 code rifles mostly had blued lugs, though it makes perfect sense that they used up any nos BSW in-the-white lugs they’d moved to Weimar from Suhl.

As you can see, I’m curious about this feature.

Click to expand...

Well I certainly could be wrong. I was just going off what I saw (or think I see). My early Erma/Feima have lugs in the white, while my dot 43 has a clearly blued lug. The difference is really noticeable. That cc block of Ham's is blued?

heavy_mech said:

Well I certainly could be wrong. I was just going off what I saw (or think I see). My early Erma/Feima have lugs in the white, while my dot 43 has a clearly blued lug. The difference is really noticeable. That cc block of Ham's is blued?

Click to expand...

Me too (being wrong). Ham’s cc sure looks blued to me, & I believe I have no colorblindness. But being that this one is an rc, I presume parts to be randomly mixed, tho sometimes they weren’t. I suspect that in the white lugs had an alloy in them to inhibit rusting and improve lubricity, they weren’t simply plain raw steel, they look like nickel to me.