Third Party Press

Apparently an MG13 mag fits a FG42 type 2

Not without a fair amount of work they do not.

I posted pics of my MG13 mags and my Fg42 mags at another site you posted the video.

The front catch, although similar, is in the wrong position, as well as several other details, however they are quite close in other respects.
With work you can get the MG13 mag to fit into the G43, and three of mine had been converted for something else, not sure what, but they were plentiful at one time and cheap, and very few people had MG13's so i guess they became the surrogate.
 
this is fairly common knowledge on the gunbuilder sites and has been for years Mg-13 mags can be converted for use in Hakims, G-43's, Yugo M-76's, Jap type 99 mgs, & a couple others. it would not surprise me that they can be modified for the FG-42 its the box
sort of like Beretta 92F mags can be modified to work in Sig P-series pistols, Walther P-88's & 99's its the box not the catch location

a few years back IMA has a sale on MG-13 mags, the building community bought them up
 
sprat said:
Mg-13 mags can be converted for use in Hakims, G-43's, Yugo M-76's, Jap type 99 mgs, & a couple others. it would not surprise me that they can be modified for the FG-42 its the box
Click to expand...

That being said...the comparison of it being the small block chevy of magazines (Interchangeability wise) still holds...albeit with modifications required.
Disclaimer...I am not a bow-tie guy...Indian head all the way..
 
Here are some pics of the FG42 G-type Mag (SSD reproduction on left, Krieghoff on right) - you can see the catch position is different (higher, closer to the lip) than the MG13 mag.
There are other smaller issues - but a quick fit, it isn't.
OP - I posted these on the other collecting forum, at the risk of repeating myself, these are for the other forum members to peak at.







MG13 - I don't have a better pic of the mags on my photo bucket account.

 
pitfighter said:
Here are some pics of the FG42 G-type Mag (SSD reproduction on left, Krieghoff on right) - you can see the catch position is different (higher, closer to the lip) than the MG13 mag.
There are other smaller issues - but a quick fit, it isn't.
OP - I posted these on the other collecting forum, at the risk of repeating myself, these are for the other forum members to peak at.







MG13 - I don't have a better pic of the mags on my photo bucket account.

Click to expand...

again if the dimensions of the box are the same, a talented welder can resolve the lip and rear catche problem, the only real problem with the lips would be is it was for another caliber, the internal receiver dimensions at the mag well is similar in the g-43, M-76, hakim etc
the other thing to consider as I was eluding to was that these MG-13 mags are no longer cheap, yet cheaper with a larger capacity that the original mags
 
sprat said:
again if the dimensions of the box are the same, a talented welder can resolve the lip and rear catche problem, the only real problem with the lips would be is it was for another caliber, the internal receiver dimensions at the mag well is similar in the g-43, M-76, hakim etc
the other thing to consider as I was eluding to was that these MG-13 mags are no longer cheap, yet cheaper with a larger capacity that the original mags
Click to expand...


I hear you, I guess it is a straight-forward enough conversion for a fairly-talented engineer -
Worthwhile I guess if you are so inclined, do a search on the last auction price on a G-type FG42 mag - it was around $5000.
The SSD mags are dimensionally perfect though (my photo makes them look slightly different), although those are not exactly easy to obtain, either.

The Shoei Japanese mags do NOT fit in a real FG42 - sadly.

The interesting thing is, there were more G-Types brought into the US than E-types, but the E-Type mags are more common. Although still uncommon.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Military Rifle Journal
Back
Top