Walther Forums banner

21 - 33 of 33 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
816 Posts
Joe, thanks for your review, and the opportunity to use this forum to share my observations moving along. Always learning.

A lot is going on in your chart, and I may need some coaching to understand what it is saying beyond the well taken point about how relatively hot 1960s .22 US ammo is.

I am guessing the indicated breech pressure figures apply only to the horizontal line in which they appear in your chart. YES So the German circa 1930s 39.3516 grain .22LR at 330 M/S (1083 FPS and subsonic) does that with 16,508 PSI breech pressure while the American .22LR StV standard velocity at 40 grains is 350 M/S muzzle velocity (1148 FPS and supersonic) but shows a much greater breech pressure of 24,000 PSI. Wanted to ask if you might be able to clarify this. The breech pressure comparison with 40 grain bullets, German to American, shows only 20 M/S greater velocity with a breech pressure 31.21% greater. And you did mention the 30% across the board velocity difference. Why isn't the speed differential far greater? Dan, I didn't perform the tests and quite frankly am not equipped to offer any explanation. Those are the figures I found and reported. With speed of sound at 1125 FPS, all three American 40 grain rounds in the chart are cited as at or above supersonic. I see the citations below those first three 40 grain US rounds are lighter 29 grain bullets of the L and Kurz rounds. One of the 40 grain citations (3rd from top in US) is noted as an HV 6 (High Velocity 6) just supersonic at 1125 FPS, where "HV 6" is defined as fired from a 6" barrel. Is that really possible in a 1960s .22LR from a 6"? I own a S&W Model 48-2 in 6" and it fires supersonic at that barrel length but it is a magnum rimfire and there is a huge muzzle flash. I noted you mentioned finding stats on both the pistols and rifles though.

Wanted also to ask how your chart might correlate with the Ballistic Data chart on page 5 of the 1936 Walther Model 1 and Model 2 brochure which shows the same subsonic muzzle velocity of 330 M/S. I for one don't quite understand the Walther chart. It was a reprint you mention, but for the US market or England? If for the US, why are the measurements in metric? I don't understand the different listings under Velocity. What does each V. mean with different numbers? Measurements at different distances? Walther's Model 2, a redesigned Model 1 meant to mimic more closely the K98k, Is that Walther's explanation or your interpretation of the thumb safety? Why would they attempt to mimic the K98k when they were producing trainers of their own design as well as the DSM134? has the longer barrel at 24 1/2". This brochure cites the Model 1 as a 20 1/2" barrel. Do we know what rifle barrel length your data is based on? The sources I used provided no information on weapon or barrel length. Maybe that is not relevant given the point you are well making though... and I am hardly in my depth.

I use the term "supersonic" as a High Velocity caution not to use that hot a round in the older guns, and admit doing that adds another term not in your chart. German Match .22LR, such as the case of GECO I recently bought, states 1080 FPS on the box. (Assume that is the old Gustav Genschow GECO, but seems a subsidiary of another company at this point.)

Here is the 1936 Walther brochure Ballistic Data chart. I am guessing these statistics are for the Model 2, with the longer 24 1/2" barrel. IMO, the Walther chart simply explains the physical properties of the .22 lr cartridge. The only information regarding the two Walther carbines is the dispersion at the bottom of the chart. Regardless, your chart seems to me to well demonstrate the point. That is all I was trying to do.

I was prompted to consider the chart, and more closely examine certain bolt area wear on my two Model 2's trying to figure out what is causing that and wanted to post about that next.

Great info, thanks!

Dan
Dan,
Many of your questions I am unable to answer as I did not perform the tests. I only recorded the information available on the edition of Bock that I had as well as the info found in my old issue of Cartridges...the World. I made some comments above in your quote to make it easier for me to answer. But basically, I was trying to demonstrate the differences and dangers presented with using an 80 year old gun designed of ammo decidedly different from modern ammo IMHO.I might comment that the broken bolt handle appeared to me to be cast rather than machined and I viewed what appeared to be some foreign material (black) in the cast metal where the break occurred.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
17 Posts
Discussion Starter #22
Joe - Thanks for your time and responses! I believe the V. column figures on page 5 are indicating distance in meters downrange, starting with V.0 being muzzle velocity, then 12.5, 50, 100, and 150 meters. I thought that made sense as the velocity column decreases while the distance increases.

It is not Walther's explanation about the way the Model 2 looks. Am sure they would not want to tip off treaty inspectors. It is my interpretation of the way the Model 2 looks based on my reading of the Simpson book, thought it seems common sense.

Guess we do not know exactly when the Model 2 came out, while the DSM 34 of 1934 was explicitly destined to be a trainer for the K98k. According to Backbone of the Wehrmacht book, pre-adoption K98k was underway at Mauser in winter 1934 with Mauser's version accepted by June, 1935. Designed to visually and ergonomically match the K98k but as a lower cost .22LR single shot trainer, the DSM 34 actually came out before Mauser's final design was accepted.

Page 4 of the 1936 Walther brochure identifies the different safety of the Model 2 as "Big safety catch (if required sliding safety catch)." The wording seems vague, maybe intentionally for Versailles? Or just a translation issue. I do not know. The rest of the brochure did not strike me as vague however. The Model 2 has a new three position wing safety, longer barrel, and tangent rear sight. To be accepted as a trainer it had to mimic the new K98k battle rifle, certainly. Further, I assume as with the DSMs, these Walthers were not purchased through the Reichswehr Ministerium so treaty inspectors were not tipped off (again from Simpson).

I lack experience with these guns, however in reading Simpson there does not seem any other explanation. Walther made the Model 2 in an effort to nail some of the funding going to the DSM program. I could well imagine it was relatively too expensive and too visually different to be accepted. A nice try though? What might clinch this is if the Model 2 was not released until the DSMs came out. Begs question when they first appeared.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
816 Posts
Joe - Thanks for your time and responses! I believe the V. column figures on page 5 are indicating distance in meters downrange, starting with V.0 being muzzle velocity, then 12.5, 50, 100, and 150 meters. I thought that made sense as the velocity column decreases while the distance increases.

It is not Walther's explanation about the way the Model 2 looks. Am sure they would not want to tip off treaty inspectors. It is my interpretation of the way the Model 2 looks based on my reading of the Simpson book, thought it seems common sense.

Guess we do not know exactly when the Model 2 came out, while the DSM 34 of 1934 was explicitly destined to be a trainer for the K98k. According to Backbone of the Wehrmacht book, pre-adoption K98k was underway at Mauser in winter 1934 with Mauser's version accepted by June, 1935. Designed to visually and ergonomically match the K98k but as a lower cost .22LR single shot trainer, the DSM 34 actually came out before Mauser's final design was accepted.

Page 4 of the 1936 Walther brochure identifies the different safety of the Model 2 as "Big safety catch (if required sliding safety catch)." The wording seems vague, maybe intentionally for Versailles? Or just a translation issue. I do not know. The rest of the brochure did not strike me as vague however. The Model 2 has a new three position wing safety, longer barrel, and tangent rear sight. To be accepted as a trainer it had to mimic the new K98k battle rifle, certainly. Further, I assume as with the DSMs, these Walthers were not purchased through the Reichswehr Ministerium so treaty inspectors were not tipped off (again from Simpson).

I lack experience with these guns, however in reading Simpson there does not seem any other explanation. Walther made the Model 2 in an effort to nail some of the funding going to the DSM program. I could well imagine it was relatively too expensive and too visually different to be accepted. A nice try though? What might clinch this is if the Model 2 was not released until the DSMs came out. Begs question when they first appeared.
That is what I thought the V column meant. I pulled out my Walther Rifle file and found hard photo copies of the original Karabiner brochure which you have in English. Either the company did their own translation or it was an English language produced version for the US and GB. The numbers might be a bit off. The pg 4 of the German version is a schematic of the two rifles. Pg 6 has the two rifles with descriptions and the lever safety could be changed to a sliding safety like the Model 1 if desired.
I have not viewed my copy of Bob’s book since it was sent after publishing as my thanks for writing the section on police trainers. But I have to read the semi-auto rifle section again as I am perplexed why he or the other ghost writers tried to link the Model 2 to the military trainers. IMO nothing can be seen in Walther literature or design to draw that conclusion. The choice of a lever safety and adjustable sight were merely improvements over the Model 1 designed for improved function. Nothing in the book Walther, a German Legend is mentioned of this intent. Thus is a new idea for me.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
17 Posts
Discussion Starter #24
I looked through my English language reproduction 1936 Walther brochure again and did not find any reference to the actual intended market (whether England or America). As noted the page 14 paragraph cites rifles going to Walther's agents in Great Britain, while the reference therein to America is only regarding the higher velocity of our ammo, even in the 1930s.

I found many references in the Simpson book correlating the way the rifle looks and functions like the forthcoming K98k as a key to a DSM contract, which biased me to think the Model 2 tried to do that. Also references to the shortage of training rifles attest that sports models were used as trainers, and indeed were allowed at times to make up 1/3rd of a new contract according to one reference in the text.

True, I found nothing in the Simpson book making an explicit statement the Model 2 is a derivative of the Model 1 made to look more like a K98k. A fair bit of text intimates this, at least in my view. I photographed only a few representative paragraphs that did this in my mind as I read them. See below.

Here also is a ballistic chart on page 60 of the Simpson book originally published by Mauser for the DSM. For some reason I do not understand, this chart below shows a much lower chamber pressure than the two figures in your chart. So another datum point for you? Same 330 M/S but a lower 9,200 psi chamber pressure. Again, the point you were making is very well supported by your chart, which was the purpose. I wish I understood more about ballistic relationships.

Simpson page 60 ballistic chart.jpg


Simpson page 28 DSM Walther.jpg


An early page in the Simpson book cites the Walther Sportmodell insufficiently appearing like the K98k. Page 590 identifies the Walther Model 1 and Model 2 as Sportmodell rifles, though I would guess the reference here is to the single shot Model 5 rifle, do we think?

Simpson page 70.jpg


There is a reference in Simpson (not on the page above) that by the early 1930s Walther was in financial difficulty. Wouldn't they want a piece of the DSM business with a rifle already being produced, the Sportmodell? It was a preferred rifle for competitive shooting and you would gain strong economy of scale landing a DSM contract.

Simpson page 572 similarities to K98k.jpg


Sporting and target models continued to serve as military trainers according to this text. So if the Walther Model 2 came out contemporaneous with the DSM, a program itself based on a concept of uniformity in the training rifle, it perhaps seems logical its modifications from the original Model 1 would have been intentional to target the Model 2 at the DSM contracts. That is where I made my interpretation, but it is only that.

For what it is worth, there are multiple references in text to Versailles treaty weapons inspectors. The impression is Walther (or any early Nazi era German arms maker) would not want to attract that kind of attention with explicit statements about a high end competition model .22LR being remade to better resemble a prohibited battle rifle. Simpson text covers this aspect.

Whether I am right about it... who knows, and certainly maybe not. Just all seems to fit.
 

Attachments

·
Registered
Joined
·
816 Posts
Dan,
I have searched my home for my copy of the book and it is not to be found. Being super-sized, I either found a place for the size or lent it to someone who hasnt returned It.

i really can’t comment much on the .22 ballistics chart. It is is English, so we don’t know if someone translated an actual Mauser chart or this was one published in English speaking countries. There are photo copies of numerous actual Mauser .22 lr ballistic reports from their archives in Jon Speed’s excellent book on the Mauser .22 rifles. It could be that the Simpson chart was created from that data.

As for the rest of your discussion, I think there is a mis-understanding of the Walther Sportmodell? You write in your paragraph 5 that Simpson describes the Models 1 and 2 as Sportmodells? Are you sure he is not referring to another rifle? This would be a confusing error. I can see why your reasoning was misled. The thought that Walther was in financial straights that you mention in paragraph 6 is new to me. They were about to conclude a deal with the NSDAP in 1934 for the production of a contract for at least 20,000 PPKs. Their new PP And PPKs were storming the world pistol market.

The Walther Sportmodell was the basic .22 bolt action design that Walther incorporated into his early DSM competition entry that Simpson mentions. It was a militrary stock configuration with a fixed cleaning rod. The same action and barrel was used in their sporting bolt action rifles: the Sportmodells V, Meister and Olympia. There never was a consideration that the modification of the Model 1 would somehow be acceptable in DSM competition. If you search Sportmodell in this rifle forum, you will see images and discussion of them.

looking at my German copy of the Sport-Karabiner brochure, I can see that the reprint added the date To the cover Or an English speaking distributor added it. Walther German brochures were usually dated with eitiher month year or full date. The German copy I have is dated at the bottom of the last page 5.36.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
17 Posts
Discussion Starter #26
Am still working up the learning curve and definitely can misunderstand, or simply do not have the experience needed yet... I especially thank you for being patient!

So, I am confused about a few things regarding nomenclature. Below is a photo of page 590 in the Simpson book, which is what I have had to go on. The Simpson book is a very fine intro, and also in depth, on the 1930s small arms makers! Am sorry to hear your copy is missing... Not inexpensive to replace.

So Simpson identifies what we know to be the Model 1 and Model 2 (hope I am reading this properly... the terms Model 1 and Model 2 are not used) as Sportmodell Semi-Auto Series 1. The coverage skips any Model 3 or 4 but goes to Model 5 the single shot on the next page. I assume the Model 5 is the model identified in Simpson to later be exemplar for the KKW. Does use of the term "Series 1" imply there were further Series somehow different?

In the "Sporter Trainer" chapters of Simpson the term Sportmodell attaches to most 1930s .22s not otherwise DSM or KKW. Another reason to think the Model 2 is a Sportmodell. However, I do not find that term at all in the 1936 English translation reproduction brochure.

Can "Sportmodell" be considered generically correct for these guns?

I spent time reviewing my Simpson copy yesterday and found a couple more things that may explain the Model 2 as a DSM like alternative. I continue to assume the Model 2 came later than the Model 1 and it was likely contemporaneous with the DSM program. In addition to the noted wing safety, 2 pounds 5 ounce heavier than the Model 1 and close to K98k, all the DSM rifles have a 64mm "military tangent-type rear sight" referred to in Simpson (page 71 is especially helpful). Further, the DSM rear site is said to have an "added central longitudinal groove." Am not sure, but there is a longitudinal full length groove in the base of the rear leaf sights on my Model 2s. It seems to inevitable. I guess it means the ramp is not full width of the sight base. Simpson states "standard velocity" ammunition is intended so the ramp distance settings accords to that. Regardless, the Model 2 does have the 64mm "military tangent type rear sight."

Further, and also appearing on page 71, is that the K98k barrel is 15.5 mm diameter at the muzzle. The Model 2 has exactly that same dimension at the muzzle. I have never measured a Model 1 barrel, which is 4" shorter and probably lighter by most of the 2 lbs 5 oz difference between the two guns (I am guessing only here).

The K98k has a file cut checkered front sight ramp, according to Simpson, and the DSM front ramp duplicated that. My front ramps however have multiple longitudinal wavy lines. As a "K" suffix gun, which I assume was made after the KKW of 1938 came out, but prior to the 1940 change of BUG and use of Eagle instead of the Crown over N, might have gone to a different anti-glare format.

Simpson states on page 17 that the Thuringian firms were "clamoring for the work" of DSMs, and he credits the DSM program with re-energizing small arms manufacturers, cartels, consortia, etc.

I did not find any specific reference to hard financial times at Walther or any other, but it seems known late Weimar was suffering in the early 1930s from the crash of 1929 terminating a lot of American and western investment money. I looked further in my references and need to take back the statement about specific financial stress at Walther - cannot find the text so cannot support it - other than the obvious affecting industry overall at the time. Thought I had read it, but just did not find it. I did not see any references in Simpson explicitly stating getting out of financial duress motivated manufacture of any of the guns they cover in the book. It seems implied by the "clamoring" comment, if not known history of those times in Germany.



Simpson Book Walther Sportmodell.jpg
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
816 Posts
I cannot fathom why Simpson used the term Sportmodell to describe the Model 1 and 2. Walther did not use the term. In their official history mentioned above the Model 1 and 2 are described as Small Caliber Rifles (Kleine-Kaliber Gewehr). The "Wehrsportgewehr" term referred to the military style stocked .22s like the Walther Sportmodell and their DSM and KKW production. The Sportmodell line also included the single shot bolt action rifles mentioned above. As Walther never used the term Sportmodell for their Karabiner Models 1 and 2, I can't quite understand why Bob decided to use the term. For some reason, the last page you copied and added to the thread will not copy. The image shows sideways on my computer and the file attribute is "-jpg" nor ".jpg" and it will not copy to read. I can see the strange WaA or whatever was stamped on that early Model 2 and I have reservations.

Walther had a large factory and whereas many of the Zella-Mehlis and Suhl gun makers suffered with the depression and results of the new firearms law passed, Walther diversified into business machines to bolster the company fortunes with the decline in firearms sales from the depression. Still, their pistol production was quite a success. They naturally hoped to share in the DSM contract production, but the NSDAP contract was quite lucrative. Their factory expanded in 1935 and even further later in the 30s.

I don't know what else to say and don't wish to keep beating a dead horse. The Models 1 and 2 were not called Sportmodells.

One final note. In the Akah catalog from about 1929 (the new 1928 gun law was discussed, the Sauer 1930 was not listed and the Walther PP was advertised as available beginning 1930), both the Model 1 and Model 2 were offered for sale. The Model 2 was noted as a heavier version of the Model 1. Also advertised was the Model 4, which displayed an entirely different bolt system from the future Walther Sportmodell series the bolt system of which Walther was in fact patenting.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Redcat94

·
Registered
Joined
·
17 Posts
Discussion Starter #28
Yes, that is "an early German military acceptance stamp on the barrel," according to the text. I am sorry the image is sideways. Have struggled with the iPhone photo app, taking pics and then later trying to orient them properly for posting. Thought I only attached one photo to my posting above. Does it show at your end that there is another photo? I guess you can see the one I posted, right? Not sure what is up with -jpg versus .jpg. These computers are stupid... and I am not even up to that level half the time...

Heading out next month to visit friends and relatives in Illinois and will drop in to Simpson Ltd and ask. I can simply say I read the book and wanted to clarify.

Calling the semi-auto capable Walther rifles Sportmodells may simply be consistent with the lengthy chapter entitled "Walther Sportmodell" running from pages 372 to 400. The Walther Sportmodell rifles are clearly marked "Sportmodell" on the receiver and Simpson book well illustrates differences among the two serial number ranges. From inception in 1933 Simpson identifies these guns as "First Serial Range" Sportmodell running from 65,000 to 81,000, and then in 1935 a "Second Serial Range" with added suffix "W" from 22,000W - 44,000W is cited. Very interesting details given, including that the second serial guns after around 33,500W had stepped down barrels. If that was done to reduce and thereby match the 15.5 mm muzzle end of the K98k, it would imply the barrels were even heavier and larger in diameter before this.

The chapter "Sporter Trainers," running pages 572 - 594, show rifles from Erma, Haenel, Mauser, Paatz, and Walther. This chapter provides text about the use of sporter rifles for military training from 1933 on, including even the falling block designs of Haenel and Weirauch. For Erma, there is no reference either on the photos of the rifles or in text identifying them as "Sportmodell." Haenel says Sportmodell on the gun depicted, and in Simpson book's text. Mauser section all referred to in text as Sportmodell, but no photo shows that word engraved on any gun. Paatz, again, just the reference in text to "Sportmodell." Walther is both in the text and the Meisterbuchse rifle has Sportmodell on it.

Agreed on the dead horse beating...

I have seen the term "Akah" now in a few places. What does it stand for, and are the catalogs available as reprints? I reviewed the written roster from Cornell yesterday, but need to search their site online.

Regardless, if Akah circa 1929 - 1930 already identifies the Model 2 then seems it was not a development of the Model 1 to better resemble the K98k, but a genuine improvement based perhaps on what the civilian customers must have wanted. Longer, heavier barrels, wing safety (or slide if you requested), tangent ramp rear, maybe all part of the market back then. I would guess other period small bores from the various makers show this too around the same time.

There is a purported Walther Model 4 for sale at a classic and antique gun store near me in Northern Virginia. I have bought from them before and may go in to look at the bolt action you described as so different from the Model 5. (Any good reason to go to their store works for me!)

Dan
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
816 Posts
Akah is the logo for the famous old German firm Albrecht Kind a. Hunsteig. Their catalogs are a wealth of period information on firearms, holsters, blades, equipment and whatever. Original catalogs are uncommon, but Cornell has republished a number. They had one dated 1932 until I notified them of the obvious dating error as it featured NSDAP party holsters which wouldn't have been around until after 1934. The new ones copies are dated 1935.

If you do visit Simpson's place, say hi for me. I saw him at the last SOS in February and a 2021 event is questionable. Hoperfully we will have this China bug conquered. I would visit the store to see the Model 4. The entire bolt/safety configuration is different. I say this from only viewing images. The safety seems to be a turn-knob on the end of the bolt. Walther completely redesigned his bolt action .22 rifles with his patent from the early 1930s. Guessing as I have it in file but forgot the dating.

Only one image shows in your above post on my laptop. It is the Model 2 with supposed early WaA which is curious to say the least. No other image shown. When I right click and copy, the resultant file has the title "Simpson-book-Walther-Sportmodell-jpg". Normally image files have the file suffix ".jpg".
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
17 Posts
Discussion Starter #30
Found three AKAH reprints listed on Cornell and am ordering them. What a great source! Yep, I do see the Katalog No 150 at 228 pages is indicated 1935 so guessing that is the one you offered the date correction on.

The error in my photo title "-jpg" is my fault but is only a typo captioning the photograph, not a computer file format command.

Happy to say hi at Simpson's, and will wander over to see the Model 4 in Northern Virginia. The photos at David Condon website show it has the circular end piece with the red spot (there should be a white spot nearby but not visible in photos, right?) indicating safety off or on. Rear leaf is missing but it has a factory installed peep sight instead according to text. $950 maybe top of or ahead of market? Walthers seem simply more valuable. You can buy a really nice GECO for half that. Here is one of the Condon photos.

1600302634558.png


I bought my first Model 2 there. S/N 33825K. After buying the rifle I had taken to reviewing other Model 2's for sale on the larger gun selling/auction websites. Not intending to buy but just learn what I could. Better sellers include many photos that can show interesting differences (earlier Model 2's with pre "K" S/N's seem to have a rounded front end to the ramp front sight, for instance). So I came upon a Model 2 that had been "restored" and really looked good. Called and spoke to the seller. Looked like someone spent a lot of time to reblue it. Very meticulous and high quality. Either reality, or the restoration from original, lopped about 1/3rd off what I had just paid. What prompted my purchase is the gun is S/N 33845K, only 20 numbers away. I figured the finding odds of that astronomical, but have a question.

I assume you know a fair bit about the way Walther's were imported back then. It seems more likely both my guns were made and imported together as part of a sequential batch of rifles in the same shipment. Does that make sense? It would mean these were not WWII bring backs. The other seller was in Kentucky. One hitch about import - perhaps you know the answer to. I have seen Model 2 rifles where "Made in Germany" appears on the left side upper rear of the trigger guard. Am I correct thinking English "Made in Germany" on a Walther means it was a dedicated export? Neither of my guns have Made in Germany on the trigger guard. No waffenamts either, just the straight Zella-Mehlis or Thuringen proofhouse markings of Eagle, Crown/N, and Nitro script. C/BUG on both, so before Jan 1940. Thoughts?

Thanks!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
816 Posts
Found three AKAH reprints listed on Cornell and am ordering them. What a great source! Yep, I do see the Katalog No 150 at 228 pages is indicated 1935 so guessing that is the one you offered the date correction on.

The error in my photo title "-jpg" is my fault but is only a typo captioning the photograph, not a computer file format command.

Happy to say hi at Simpson's, and will wander over to see the Model 4 in Northern Virginia. The photos at David Condon website show it has the circular end piece with the red spot (there should be a white spot nearby but not visible in photos, right?) indicating safety off or on. Rear leaf is missing but it has a factory installed peep sight instead according to text. $950 maybe top of or ahead of market? Walthers seem simply more valuable. You can buy a really nice GECO for half that. Here is one of the Condon photos.

View attachment 94380

I bought my first Model 2 there. S/N 33825K. After buying the rifle I had taken to reviewing other Model 2's for sale on the larger gun selling/auction websites. Not intending to buy but just learn what I could. Better sellers include many photos that can show interesting differences (earlier Model 2's with pre "K" S/N's seem to have a rounded front end to the ramp front sight, for instance). So I came upon a Model 2 that had been "restored" and really looked good. Called and spoke to the seller. Looked like someone spent a lot of time to reblue it. Very meticulous and high quality. Either reality, or the restoration from original, lopped about 1/3rd off what I had just paid. What prompted my purchase is the gun is S/N 33845K, only 20 numbers away. I figured the finding odds of that astronomical, but have a question.

I assume you know a fair bit about the way Walther's were imported back then. It seems more likely both my guns were made and imported together as part of a sequential batch of rifles in the same shipment. Does that make sense? It would mean these were not WWII bring backs. The other seller was in Kentucky. One hitch about import - perhaps you know the answer to. I have seen Model 2 rifles where "Made in Germany" appears on the left side upper rear of the trigger guard. Am I correct thinking English "Made in Germany" on a Walther means it was a dedicated export? Neither of my guns have Made in Germany on the trigger guard. No waffenamts either, just the straight Zella-Mehlis or Thuringen proofhouse markings of Eagle, Crown/N, and Nitro script. C/BUG on both, so before Jan 1940. Thoughts?

Thanks!
I will try to work with that image you posted. They are peculiar critters.
I think the price of the Model 4 is high especially considering the missing sight. Rifles with missing pieces are often on Gunbroker. Walthers are popular but the rifles and shotguns arent commanding huge prices like the pistols. The trainers are very popular. You might visit the K98k forum and visit the .22 sub forum. I have never handled a Model 4.

unfortunately I cannot comment on the Walther importation history. Little is known except Stoeger was apparently their US representative. All factory records at the Walther factory were either destroyed or carried back to the USSR before they destroyed the plant. Pistols bearing made in Germany legends have been returned by veterans, though this cannot be taken as company practice of marking such for German domestic sales.

Yes, finding consecutuve or close serial numbers is rare. It happened to me years ago. I bought a Walther ‘Sportmodell’ style trainer from an Ohio dealer in the early 80s. Almost ten years later I got a mailing he was selling his collection. There listed was the a consecutuve number Sportmodell to the one he had sold me. He had not realized the first was consecutuve when he had bought and sold it. But they are gone.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
17 Posts
Discussion Starter #32
I noticed that too on the missing bits. Especially the sling piece on the bottom of the stock seems missing on a number of guns. Thanks for the head's up on the K98k forum/.22 sub forum!

Maybe the Simpson's will have guidance about the "Made in Germany" marking, if/as such appears on the guns.

Quick question you may help with. Received a reproduction copy of "Original MAUSER Miniature Rifles" from Cornell. It covers the stated 7 different models, in the E 300, 310, 320 and the M 410 and 420 range. Am trying to date this brochure. There are 7 owner testimonials and all are dated. One in 1925, one 1929, and the rest 1930. On lower left of brochure cover page is "Pe 2B - 5 - RG. IV. 31." You must have seen this sort of thing. The IV .31. may be April 1931?

In the dead horse category... assuming this brochure is likely 1931, Mauser has introduced a "New Pattern" Es 340N which corresponds with some of the changes from the Model 1 to Model 2. It is longer, much heavier at 7 pounds, and features what they call a "Cam rearsight" which Simpson identifies as "military type tangent." I am guessing GECO and others were all doing the same thing round the same time in later Weimar.

In addition to the Akah reprints, I also ordered a few of the huge (up to 500+ pages) reproduction Stoeger catalogs, and several GECO pieces (1932, 1937, and 1938). Interesting stuff!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
17 Posts
Discussion Starter #33
Actually missed a page on the testimonials, so there are more than 7 and several are dated into 1931 but no more recent.
 
21 - 33 of 33 Posts
Top