Query re Yugo M53 Machine Gun

**waggy** · 02-01-2010, 11:19 AM

Heck I dont mind a shooting version lol

**stewfoxy** · 04-20-2010, 11:54 AM

Hello All

I have an 'MG42' on my desk, or rather what claims to be one. The more I research on here (and a couple of other places), the more I think it may have started out in 1944 at Gustloff Werke in Suhl but along the way acquired some M53 parts via a stint in the Austrian army. At least that's the most optimistic explanation I can come up with.

I'm a complete novice at this so would appreciate your views. Some of the contributions on the subject of these guns had already been very informative on rivets v screws, safety catches and the various types of MG42 receivers compared to M53 ones.

I've photographed the various stamps and marks and posted a screengrab of the picture folder as a list view. This is to identify which parts the markings are on.

I'm told it's an 'early deact' but there's no certificate. There are what I assume are three proof stamps including one on the barrel. This is removable and the gun cocks and dry fires.

Hope this makes sense and thanks in advance for any advice or info.

Simon

**HARRY THE MOLE** · 04-20-2010, 02:26 PM

Hi Simon,
The parts of the Mg42 look ok, there are a few letters I am unsure about though. But in general it does look a WW11 gun. However, what DOES bother me are the deactivation stamps. On the receiver it is stamped... D/A 89 and the recoil booster appears to have D/A 01. It's rather odd to have to D/A stamps with different dates. If you know how to, remove the bolt and look at the D/A stamp on that. All the dates should really be the same, but there could be in innocent explanation for this. I've just noticed that you say the barrel is removable, this sets alarm-bells ringing I'm affraid. That is strictly forbidden, all barrels are supposed to be welded in place -even on early deacts!
Regards,
Harry.

**searchandfind** · 04-20-2010, 02:56 PM

by stewfoxy

Hello All

I have an 'MG42' on my desk, or rather what claims to be one. The more I research on here (and a couple of other places), the more I think it may have started out in 1944 at Gustloff Werke in Suhl but along the way acquired some M53 parts via a stint in the Austrian army. At least that's the most optimistic explanation I can come up with.

I'm a complete novice at this so would appreciate your views. Some of the contributions on the subject of these guns had already been very informative on rivets v screws, safety catches and the various types of MG42 receivers compared to M53 ones.

I've photographed the various stamps and marks and posted a screengrab of the picture folder as a list view. This is to identify which parts the markings are on.

I'm told it's an 'early deact' but there's no certificate. There are what I assume are three proof stamps including one on the barrel. This is removable and the gun cocks and dry fires.

Hope this makes sense and thanks in advance for any advice or info.

Simon

Hello Simon,

the most parts inclusive the receiver look good to me. The complete grip assembly and the cocking handle are from a post war Yugoslavian M53, the stamps on the bipod are not original and the code bcd was only used by Gustloff Werke for the K98k and not for the MG42. The bipod is a post war version may be from a MG3.

Christian

**HARRY THE MOLE** · 04-20-2010, 03:13 PM

by searchandfind

Hello Simon,

the most parts inclusive the receiver look good to me. The complete grip assembly and the cocking handle are from a post war Yugoslavian M53, the stamps on the cocking handle are not original and the code bcd was only used by Gustloff Werke for the K98k and not for the MG42. The bipod is also post war may be from a MG3.

Christian

If that bipod leg is post-war, someone must have added wartime stamps to it! If some stamps are fake, then maybe others are...

**searchandfind** · 04-20-2010, 03:24 PM

by HARRY THE MOLE

If that bipod leg is post-war, someone must have added wartime stamps to it! If some stamps are fake, then maybe others are...

The bipod is definitely post war, look at the bipod head, the code bcd was never used on MG42 parts.

**stewfoxy** · 04-20-2010, 03:38 PM

Thanks Harry and Christian. I've attached a few more pictures showing two more deactivation stamps and one shot of three (why three together?) WaA stamps I hadn't noticed before on the top rear of the receiver where it meets the stock.

The stamp on the bolt is very unclear, it almost looks like it was done twice. My best guess is '89' whereas the barrel is clearly '01'.

Christian - I have photographed the various parts as requested for your survey so will email them directly.

Any more facts or speculation appreciated.

(Incidentally, is the 'scarring' on top of the barrel in picture 13 a consequence of the deactivation process?)

Simon

**oakrodent** · 05-05-2010, 12:29 PM

I have bought more than my fair share of MG-42s. I have 6 of them. I also have two MG-34s and a MG-13. To the casual passerby the M-53 will pass for a MG-42. Anybody who knows the guns can tell them apart immediately. There are some big differences in the receivers and you can't change them with out doing some real work to it.

If you live in the States you have the choice of building a deactivated MG-42. This takes allot of work, but can be done even as your first build. You can buy a semi auto M-53 for $2,000 but they are a real peace of junk! I would know, I have helped about a dozen owners of them to try to get them to run correctly. They also have a nasty habit of firing more then 1 rnd a trigger pull. BRP sells high quality semi auto parts. He farms out the work for building them. Top notch stuff but you are going to pay for it. $4,500 to $6,000 for one of them. At lest you know it is going to work, not go full auto, or have an out of battery explosion. ( I have seen two of the others do this and one guy lost a finger )

**m3bobby** · 05-06-2010, 11:31 AM

In my opinion, it looks like some one has used this gun to salvage parts to build another more correct gun. As Harry has said, anything deacivated post 1988 should have the barrel pinned/welded in place (Not all pre 88 guns had removable barrels).

I think some one has bought a 2001 deact (May have been special) and then swaped the incorrect parts for parts out of a much older deac gun to make a corect spec gun. If i were you, to cover yourself 100%, I would weld the barrel in place (I'm not sure how this is done a 42). It will be obvious to the knowing, that its been swapped around but all parts are deactivated and if the barrel is re-pinned then at least its still meets the criteria.