Sturmgewehr question:

[Jarrettgs]

Hello all,

I recently purchased HMG's Sturmgewehr reproduction. I'm getting it delivered to me in white metal, to simply blue it myself rather than getting it in a parkerized finish (since I plan to use it in reenacting). This leads me to my question, after looking at photos of sturmgewehrs, it seems like in the later war, some parts were blued, and some were not. (Or the finish is just incredibly worn on some parts, but it seems unlikely considering how evenly the bluing wore off the whole parts, like the stock assembly, handguard, upper receiver, etc.) My question is: would it be more correct to blue the whole weapon, and age each piece individually, or blue certain parts, and age other parts without any finish? Was there any finish the germans used other than blued and bare metal on their sturmgewehrs? Thanks!

[bmg17a1]

Late in the war, from examples of different makers, some did not put any finish on their MPs or STGs or mixed bluing and a "clear" phosphate for which Steyr is noted on both whole and partial STGs as well as on MG42s. With use and time this phosphate finish can make the metal surface appear to not have been finished or the blued finish has worn off. The lack of finish or use of phosphate is far less common than a full blued finish which was the predominant treatment. Currently, there is no ource for a comparable clear phosphate finish such as was used by the WWII makers, so, if you want to identify your gun as a late war example, then leaving the finish off completely or having a mixed blued upper and unfinished lower, or blued lower and unfinished upper would do it. Leaving the finish off will make people curious who see the gun, so be prepared with an answer......

[STG44]

If you are going to use it for re-enacting I think blueing the entire gun would be best. Since this reproduction gun does like look quite different from a real MP44 I think using a mixture of finishes on it would make the differences stand out even more. Just my 2 cents.

[pitfighter]

BMG covered it all.
Late-war MP44's are blued, Phosphate, or "no Finish"* or a combination of the three.

*As opposed to a "no" finish - which is how they were designated - they would usually spray a thin layer of clear lacquer material onto the white metal in lieu of a chemical blue, or phosphate finish. The lacquer gives the metal a slightly "off" satin color/shade and gives some rust protection.

There are some late war completely "no" finish guns photographed - where this is authentic, those guns would definitely be emergency outfitted guns, no thread on muzzle nut, "circled" mag release, no guard front-sight, etc., so you'd have to work over the HMG gun to make it work

Also I have encountered a black "enamel" finish on several MP44 + Stg44 lowers, late-war (X '44 + '45) and primary production (I have these here and can photograph if interested) - the thin layer of enamel usually "cracks" around the front body locking joint. BMG is the only person I have heard reference this material, when we were discussing FG42 lowers. One of them was a bring back, so definitely not a post war finish.

[Jarrettgs]

If you are going to use it for re-enacting I think blueing the entire gun would be best. Since this reproduction gun does like look quite different from a real MP44 I think using a mixture of finishes on it would make the differences stand out even more. Just my 2 cents.

Could you please elaborate? I'm really curious as to all the differences in appearance. I'd like to learn a little bit more about them. Thanks!

[STG44]

Could you please elaborate? I'm really curious as to all the differences in appearance. I'd like to learn a little bit more about them. Thanks!

The trunion area of the receiver on the HMG is much longer, wider, & rounder than an original MP44. I have not seen one of these HMG's in person but there was a nice side by side comparison picture some where on the internet.

[Garn]

I was able to handle one of HMGs StGs last week. The ergonomics feel like the real thing. The details that differ are in the receiver and trunnion, as well as the trigger pack. The receiver uses a castle nut to secure the barrel so you can change barrels to different calibers. They are also using an in house designed magazine that looks like an StG44 mag, yet fits longer cartridges like .223, .300 BLK, and 7.62x39. Their mag is polymer and based on STANAG magazines. The lower housing is missing some of the stamping detail found in the original probably due to the use of a standard HK91 trigger pack. Over all I think the rifle is very convincing with the bonus being you don't have to worry about finding 8mm Kurz, $300 mags, or damaging a valuble piece of history.

[Alan Smith]

Garn,

One of my buddies examined these at the SHOT Show a few weeks ago; his observations were consistent with yours.