[jcoe]

In Buxton’s P38 book, Vol 1, page 184 he discusses out of order WaA stamps found on right side of slide on “rare occasions” in P38 ac 43 3rd variation (m and n block) and in later production. In contrast to the usual sequence (E/359, E/swastika, E/359 –applied left to right), he noted the aberrant sequence (E/swastika, E/359, E/359) on three ac 43 P38s in the m block (456,2998,4028). These are the only examples I found in his total listing of Walther P38 serial numbers. Perhaps there are other examples in this list that were not reported.



Download Attachment: 1.jpg
63.93KB
Figure one shows this “goofy” sequence on ac 43 P38 #9059m. It is apparent that the first WaA is the only proof out of position as it is located about 1 inch to the right of its normal place. The subsequent E/swastika, E/359 marks are correctly placed.



Download Attachment: 2.jpg
47.54KB
Figure two shows another example of this deviant sequence on ac 43 P39 #6401m. Again, only the first WaA is misplaced resulting in the aberrant sequence.
Presumably the goofy sequence recorded by Buxton in the other m block ac 43 P38s (456,2998,4028) were the result of the same incorrect location of the first WaA.
In my limited collection of straight line ac 43 m block P38s, this goof seems to be a common (100%) occurrence.
Is this goofy sequence really uncommon?
And always the result of misplaced 1st WaA mark?
And restricted to the m block of ac 43?
One might speculate that this goof was the product of one inspector, who had his own idea where the first WaA should be located.
John

 

[Orv Reichert]

John,

They are a common aberration in the M and N block guns...I guess they forgot to tell 'ol Heinz' where to stamp them when the slide passed muster?

Orv

Orvel L. Reichert
P O Box 67
Vader WA 98593
360 245 3492 tel
360 245 3702 fax
360 520 6520 cel
[email protected]

Quote.....Happiness is a choice that requires effort at times.-- Anon.

 

[jcoe]

Thanks Orv,
And is the errant first WaA always the culprit for this goofy sequence?
John

 

[Orv Reichert]

It seems to be....but, these are not always reported so I cannot say for sure..

Orv

Orvel L. Reichert
P O Box 67
Vader WA 98593
360 245 3492 tel
360 245 3702 fax
360 520 6520 cel
[email protected]

 

[Mark]

John,

Here is my example, Orv is correct, they are very common.

In my opinion, since the e/359 would be the first marking on the slide when it was inspected, the firing proof would have been added next ..... on the wrong side of the aceptance stamp!

The final acceptance stamp was added after the proof test ... in the correct position by the inspector .... he must have known the order of the stamps..

Wonder if the firing proof guy caught any crap from the plant for the out of order test marking. It must have been some time before they corrected his mis-deeds.

Just to be clear, the first acceptance stamp is for a part that has not been assembled into a gun but passed inspection for assembly.

After the gun is assembled and serial numbered, it is fired with two over pressure rounds and the slide, barrel and locking block receive the firing proof.

It is then reinspected and fired again with a full mag of ammo and gets the final acceptance stamp. This means the gun has passed the Heers test and Walther can get paid for the gun, it is ready for service.

Mark

Download Attachment: AC43inglelinecode.jpg
169.17 KB

 

[jcoe]

Thanks Mark,
The official directive for stamp position on P38 slides is unknown to me, however one would assume that position on the slide was primary and relation to previous mark was secondary (and perhaps not even mentioned as an alternative choice). If so, then the firing proof guy was in the clear, because he was placing his proof in the prescribed place and that is why he/was or they/were consistent in this proof placement as this batch of erroneously 1st WaA stamped slides were used up. The question is if this aberrant sequence was consistently used through ac43 m/n production, as these goofed 1st WaA stamped slides were assembled and proofed? If so, it would indicate slide position was primary. Has anyone seen ac 43 m or n block P38s with the correct proof sequence but shifted an inch to the right?
John

 

[Orv Reichert]

All that I have seen would lead me to believe that the slide acceptance WaA [the first stamp] was the one struck 'out in right field'. The other two always seem to be in the proper spot.

Again, John, this is entirely</u> empirical!

Orv

 

[jcoe]

Thanks Orv,
Well I agree this is pure speculation and P38s seem to have a lot of weird unexplained features that are a challenge to explain, but also makes them interesting critters to collect. Buxton refers to the goof sequence as “rare” and I presume it was not observed/reported to him with the serial numbers he entered in his book? How frequent is goof in n block and have you seen in later production?
John