35 marking on P-38s

[M1903A3]

Hello! I am interested in the current thought on what the “35” marking is, see below. Pictures are borrowed from the P-38 forum where I know several folks are members as well. The K98 triggers are mine, and I am trying to figure out who might have made these parts. Have you seen a “35” on anything else? TIA.

David

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[flynaked]

Sight components from Suhl and Z-M as well, almost always in conjunction with their use on commercial 98k’s which utilized other rejected components to a high degree as well. It’s still thought to be a rejection marking as mentioned previously.

 

[flynaked]

*also on Walther receivers

 

[flynaked]

*and on barrels (maker unknown, probably Sauer). It doesn’t appear to be specific to Walther but common to production within Suhl Z-M.

 

[sprat]

did I see this posted over at P-38 forums a week or so back?????

 

[mrfarb]

It doesn’t appear specific to Walter, but I can tell you Walter wasn’t using p38 frames made by someone else which is kinda a clue imo. Walter has the ability to make all of the things you see it on - as to the barrel, haven’t noticed that but with the way the consortium worked who knows where a barrel was finished? Or perhaps sent? It’s a neat area to study. I see odd patterned rear sights on SS gew conversions with it. I’m personally beginning to feel civilian shops in Suhl did most of the SS Gew conversions for the SS which would tie in well with the 35 marked parts and Suhl.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[M1903A3]

did I see this posted over at P-38 forums a week or so back?????

You saw a post that mentioned them, but there were no solid suggestions about what it meant or who it belonged to. The fact that it has appeared OVER-stamping some other markings, and that it appears sometimes near an asterisk, led some P-38 collectors to believe that “35” was a cancellation mark, but that doesn’t make sense to me. That would require one inspector passing the part and another rejecting it, and then it goes in a pistol ANYWAY??

The “35” on triggers is always alone, comes in two different types, and so far as I see never has any other markings on the trigger with it at all.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[M1903A3]

Also on the P-38 forum they had photos from a book that showed “35” on P-38 magazines as well.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[mrfarb]

All I can add is sometimes in 98k armorers parts you find some odd differences with normal production parts, or odd marking styles compared to “normal” parts. It may be that serviceable oddball parts were “35” marked for the depot system and later deemed acceptable for use. I still feel 35 marked parts are Walther made, it makes the most sense. It’s just a feeling based on what you see it on.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[M1903A3]

All I can add is sometimes in 98k armorers parts you find some odd differences with normal production parts, or odd marking styles compared to “normal” parts. It may be that serviceable oddball parts were “35” marked for the depot system and later deemed acceptable for use. I still feel 35 marked parts are Walther made, it makes the most sense. It’s just a feeling based on what you see it on.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

FWIW I agree and that makes the most sense because of what we see it on and how it’s used.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[flynaked]

A part can pass initial inspection and then fail later. Take a rifle for instance, suppose it fails final accuracy tests, what becomes of the parts, are they simply recirculated as is, or were they perhaps marked in some way? As Mike mentioned, I don’t believe there is any way this is a maker mark given the evidence presented. I personally believe it is along the lines of a rejection and or acceptance of a previously rejected part, think “U” and “X” etc potentially used in this same scenario on parts out of Suhl. Many later triggers have no markings at all, so don’t let the lack of previous inspection cloud that point.

Here’s that barrel as mentioned for reference, I have no clue where I got this picture or who owns the rifle so perhaps they can provide us with more details.

 

[flynaked]

I meant to say “as parts out of Suhl.”


Here’s a rear sight as well. Also if you look in the picture reference, Andrew has a nice commercial with the receiver marked as such.

 

[M1903A3]

Great food for thought guys, thank you!! If you spot any more instances of “35” please share them!!

Happy New Year!!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[mrfarb]

I wish I had kept all of the instances I have seen this mark in one place, its a treasure hunt. Here's a few, both on SS gew conversions.

 

[M1903A3]

I wish I had kept all of the instances I have seen this mark in one place, its a treasure hunt. Here's a few, both on SS gew conversions.

Wow those are great!! Hiding right out in plain sight! There MUST be an explanation and I think you’re on it, having to do with Walther or at least OFTEN seen on Walther parts. I’ve never seen it on K98 rifles beyond the trigger until today, so thank you mrfarb and flynaked! If you come across more please post them here. Maybe it can yet be cracked.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[mrfarb]

Look at the components supplied by Walther to the consortium. It’s in Vol. 1. I just don’t have that information right this second. And think about what Walther was capable of manufacturing. If you don’t have it I’ll look it up in Volume 1 and post it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[M1903A3]

Look at the components supplied by Walther to the consortium. It’s in Vol. 1. I just don’t have that information right this second. And think about what Walther was capable of manufacturing. If you don’t have it I’ll look it up in Volume 1 and post it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I actually do not own Vol 1 or either of the two volume II. So if you could maybe just summarize that would be greatly appreciated!! Thank you!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[RyanE]

I actually do not own Vol 1 or either of the two volume II. So if you could maybe just summarize that would be greatly appreciated!! Thank you!

The document in Vol1 (pg 319-320) lists receivers, sights, sight parts to include the base and spring.

I am more inclined to lean toward the idea of a manufacture marking than a rejection/substandard stamp. I think it would make sense for Walther to outsource some of their work, especially the commercial stuff, to some of the smaller firms around Z-M and Suhl. There were certainly lots of firms capable of making barrels, triggers, and probably even machining the P38 frames.

Just some interesting things I noted: Every decently photographed second contract Swedish M/39 (delivered in 1940?) I could find had a "E/N 35" marked barrel with no other markings present. Frames were not so marked. Not sure about the rest of the parts, though some 35 marked Swedish magazines are reported. Also found a later commercial HP with a 35 frame with no rejection stamp as posted above.

 

[Mauserken]

I've always found that mark interesting and saved a few shots over the the years.
Ken

 

[flynaked]

Good info Ryan, my only problem with that is the fact that none of these 35 parts are apparently turning up on a military accepted piece without an additional asterisk with it. All the 98k’s I’ve seen are either late commercials or earlier SS commercials. Here we have again, commercial pistols appearing with it but the e359 example above has an asterisk beside the 35. The fact that it is used to over stamp inspections is also problematic to this IMO.

You are definitely right that Suhl Z-M production is a confusing mess when it comes to consortium work.