steyr 1940 660 matching

[a j s]

I have had this one for 10 years.Cleaning rod matches.Stephen98k says these K suffix 660s were assembled in April/May 1941

 

[a j s]

more

 

[hale1940]

Great code form my favourite manufacturer. Fantastic rifle. Thanks for sharing. A+

 

[Muncher 1953]

thanks for posting a RIFLE! I dunno beans about Steyr guns, but now I know a little it more.
Thank you!

 

[Jdt]

What a gorgeous example!! Thanks for sharing

 

[Stephan98k]

Thanks for showing and supporting with the data, it's a nice matching K98k! There is much space, maybe the barrel lot number is hidden under the woodline, it's a 1940 Radom barrel blank, finished at the Steyr-Daimler-Puch Letten factory.

I will copy and paste my comment to make the discussion more understandable. In the other thread with the bnz 40 I have written:
"The "bnz 40" belong to the "660 1940" order/production run. The K98ks with the code "660 1940" and "bnz 40" in the "k" and "l" blocks got assembled in April/May 1941."
"By the way, in 1939 there was no K98k production, the assembly of the first order "660 1939" started in January 1940. By January 27, 1940, a total of 1,440 K98ks had been accepted."

"One of the most important things: The previously assumed 1941 Steyr production numbers are not correct, due to the high number of K98k an error in the old document was assumed but it was a wrong assumption.
Correct is:
In 1941, the K98k production numbers was not lower than in 1940, but higher. The production numbers for 1941 even exceeds the numbers for 1942.
The "Large Font" Steyr receiver with e/623 Waffenamt acceptance and the "Small Font" Radom receiver with e/77 Waffenamt acceptance are a separate assembly run. These two assembly lines at Steyr-Daimler-Puch in Steyr assembled K98k at the same time, but one of the two lines started with the bnz41 first, the other assembly line followed a little later with the bnz41 receivers. These two K98k assembly lines at Steyr were strictly separated from each other, the K98k from the second assembly line even had its own name."

The output of K98k at Steyr is not uniform, in some weeks more was produced than in a whole month just before. Some letter blocks were assembled over a period of more than two months. In other months, more than two complete letter blocks were assembled. Other K98k manufacturers had more consistent production and if you divide the annual production by the months, you can get some usable results. You can't do it with Steyr, the results would be totally useless.

Actually I only said what the Steyr factory documents and the documents from the armaments authorities say. I had to make the effort and analyze all Steyr factory documents. The numbers I used are exact figures from Steyr for weeks and even days.

Your "660 1940" Sn 825k got assembled around mid April 1941. During this period an incredible amount happened at Steyr. A complete second K98k assembly line had to be set up and two different K98k series had to be assembled strictly separated from each other. In addition, a third rifle, the G.29/40, was assembled in the same department during the same period. In addition they was busy with other weapons like MP40, MG34, PzB39, Vis-pistol etc. In the past winter there were many problems due to energy difficulties, transport difficulties due to a lack of wagons was also a problem later on and many other things.

It's not a mistake, your "660 1940" Sn 825k got assembled around April 1941 and some days later "bnz 40" Sn 9724k and the other "bnz 40" coded receivers. Up to the "n" block they are intermingled with the "660 1940" coded receivers. When the order (660 1940) was delivered, the Steyr K98k production was continued with the Steyr "bnz 41" coded receivers. The second assembly line with the "bnz 41" Radom receivers was already in operation when Steyr "660 1940" K98k were still being assembled.

 

[Stephan98k]

This thread is very important: Does code "bnz 40" exist?

There are many important comments and here is a excerpt:

SDP did do many odd things, many of their early rifles, in this range especially (1940-1942), have characteristics of later rifles. Meaning they were actually finished much later. This is supported by documents Wolfgang and Jon Speed found that SDP was having difficulties getting rifles accepted.

I decided to go back through my database and examine all the rifles around these ranges, some of my earlier comments were not clear and some were incorrect.

1. serialing of both receiver and barrel is consistent through the early bnz/42 first block, there are a couple exceptions in the j & k block (SRO), but both were later assembles, rifles finished in early 1942.

2. right receiver acceptance, the last rifle with full RR acceptance is a bnz/41 j-block, and it is lonely... consistent full RR acceptance (meaning e/77 e/623x3, or e/623x4) seems to end early in the j-block. No rifle has been recorded with full RR acceptance after the 7000-j block of bnz/41.

3. On closer examination, the bnz/41 range ends at 5949 k, the l-blocks on closer examination were actually i-blocks I miss filed. Backbone has a 9724 k as the high rifle, so an L-block probably does exist, but I have not recorded one (one might note that 9724 k is also THE bnz/40, so who knows what Bob Jensen's next highest is?).

That the two known bnz/40 overstrikes have full e/623x4 on the RR, no finals (some i-k bnz/41 have no finals, but most do, latest w/o is 6056 j, an rc, and it is lonely.. all k-blocks have finals and only one RR acceptance) seem to suggest these were made earlier in 1941 or in late 1940. Because by the bnz/41 k-block, actually the bnz/41 j-block, rifles generally start to have only have one RR acceptance and have a final. The later it gets from the bnz/41 j-block on, the more unlikely these are to be bnz/41 k-blocks or l-blocks with these characteristics, and both would be new highs if they are actually bnz/41's.

Anyway, while i still think these deserve a healthy dose of skepticism, I think it is at least plausible and there is at least as good a case these are legit as they are fraudulent. I do agree though that "normally" makers did not overstrike dates on rifles made later (BLM, Gustloff etc..), though these are receivers made "earlier", using the following years receivers pattern. Something like this probably couldn't occur at Mauser, or a privately held firm (such as "Private" property existed in NS Germany... especially at war), though a mismanaged company, owned by the state, loaded up with NS dirtbag opportunists that hold their positions due to influence rather than competence, - sure anything is possible.

I had to double check, but what are the odds that bnz/41 high in Backbone is the same rifle that is also listed as the earliest bnz/40? Which is shown in Backbone? Quite a coincidence...

Didn't think about it until just now, but that would need explaining, - a very careful explanation.

 

[joryfreeburg]

Nice honest example of a tough year/code to come by……

 

[Muncher 1953]

Thanks for showing and supporting with the data, it's a nice matching K98k! There is much space, maybe the barrel lot number is hidden under the woodline, it's a 1940 Radom barrel blank, finished at the Steyr-Daimler-Puch Letten factory.

I will copy and paste my comment to make the discussion more understandable. In the other thread with the bnz 40 I have written:
"The "bnz 40" belong to the "660 1940" order/production run. The K98ks with the code "660 1940" and "bnz 40" in the "k" and "l" blocks got assembled in April/May 1941."
"By the way, in 1939 there was no K98k production, the assembly of the first order "660 1939" started in January 1940. By January 27, 1940, a total of 1,440 K98ks had been accepted."

"One of the most important things: The previously assumed 1941 Steyr production numbers are not correct, due to the high number of K98k an error in the old document was assumed but it was a wrong assumption.
Correct is:
In 1941, the K98k production numbers was not lower than in 1940, but higher. The production numbers for 1941 even exceeds the numbers for 1942.
The "Large Font" Steyr receiver with e/623 Waffenamt acceptance and the "Small Font" Radom receiver with e/77 Waffenamt acceptance are a separate assembly run. These two assembly lines at Steyr-Daimler-Puch in Steyr assembled K98k at the same time, but one of the two lines started with the bnz41 first, the other assembly line followed a little later with the bnz41 receivers. These two K98k assembly lines at Steyr were strictly separated from each other, the K98k from the second assembly line even had its own name."

The output of K98k at Steyr is not uniform, in some weeks more was produced than in a whole month just before. Some letter blocks were assembled over a period of more than two months. In other months, more than two complete letter blocks were assembled. Other K98k manufacturers had more consistent production and if you divide the annual production by the months, you can get some usable results. You can't do it with Steyr, the results would be totally useless.

Actually I only said what the Steyr factory documents and the documents from the armaments authorities say. I had to make the effort and analyze all Steyr factory documents. The numbers I used are exact figures from Steyr for weeks and even days.

Your "660 1940" Sn 825k got assembled around mid April 1941. During this period an incredible amount happened at Steyr. A complete second K98k assembly line had to be set up and two different K98k series had to be assembled strictly separated from each other. In addition, a third rifle, the G.29/40, was assembled in the same department during the same period. In addition they was busy with other weapons like MP40, MG34, PzB39, Vis-pistol etc. In the past winter there were many problems due to energy difficulties, transport difficulties due to a lack of wagons was also a problem later on and many other things.

It's not a mistake, your "660 1940" Sn 825k got assembled around April 1941 and some days later "bnz 40" Sn 9724k and the other "bnz 40" coded receivers. Up to the "n" block they are intermingled with the "660 1940" coded receivers. When the order (660 1940) was delivered, the Steyr K98k production was continued with the Steyr "bnz 41" coded receivers. The second assembly line with the "bnz 41" Radom receivers was already in operation when Steyr "660 1940" K98k were still being assembled.

what was the reason for the two separate lines? (assuming both were making rifles for the Heer, not one doing a Heer contract & the other for the ss)

 

[Hambone]

Beautiful 660 Stephan Pic sticky for ref.

 

[Loewe]

This thread is very important: Does code "bnz 40" exist?

There are many important comments and here is a excerpt:

Stephan, if you really want an updated email me. (not saying I have a better understanding today but if important I will reply off-forum)

 

[Muncher 1953]

 

[Loewe]

No quoting my post.... I am going full Hambone on all hostiles.

 

[Loewe]

825 k is very early for RD BC's for SDP 98k production; i-j was the beginning as far as trends go; 825k (this rifle) was once in the US, pics from 2005 (a high quality collector from Alabama owned this in 2005) & 2009 exist, neither show a lot but here the gap may suggest no lot, though most do sport lots in the front of the code... hard to say here but this is very early for SDP 98k (RD seem to have begun on 29/40 production, all the earliest RD lots are found here)

 

[heavy_mech]

So the barrel blanks from Radom seems to add credence to Stephan's timeframe for these '40 dated examples actually being assembled in late spring '41. Although the blank is dated '40, after arrival at Letten they were finished and then sent to Steyr to be assembled into complete rifles.

Is it still accepted that Radom parts first begin to arrive very late in 1940 or January '41?