SSD's PTR44 / BD44 In Detail The Semi Automatic MP44

The #1 community for Gun Owners of the Northeast

Member Benefits:

  • No ad networks!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • Combloc

    Stop Negassing me!!!!!
    Nov 10, 2010
    7,212
    In a House
    This past Friday, I picked up two magazines at the MAX show. One is East German production and the other was made by Haenel during the war. What I paid for the pair made me sick to my stomach but I didn't have a need for them back when they were 50 bucks a pop.....oh well. Anywho, once I got them home and compared them to the SSD magazines, it quickly became obvious that the SSD ones are pretty much a lost cause. When it comes to magazines feeding properly, it's all about geometry and SSD clearly got all the angles wrong when they made mine. Up to this point, almost everything I read pointed to the dimples on the sideplates being stamped in the wrong place. That is true but that is only the tip of the iceberg; we'll do some comparisons in a minute. First, I want to talk about how well the ones I just bought work/do not work.
    The Eastie produced magazine clicked right in, the dimples were in the right place and there was no front to rear rock in the magazine well. As stated earlier, the MP44 was/is known to be magazine sensitive and front to rear rock is usually the kiss of death in the reliability department. So, I was hopeful about the DDR magazine.
    The Haenel magazine clicked right in and the dimples were in the right place BUT there was significant rock.....not good. Then I remembered a conversation I had had with the MP44 Wizard. He told me that he had a number of WWII magazines that rocked in his original rifles and caused feeding problems. His fix was to layer tape on the front of the magazine until it fit properly in the magazine well with no rock. If it worked for him, I might as well give it a try. I found that ten strips of cellophane tape layered on the front of the magazine made it lock up tight. Interesting.
    On Saturday, I headed out to the range with 80 rounds and the new magazines. Two sets of 20 in the DDR produced only one jam and it was a stovepipe on ejection which is not a fault of the magazine. Next up was the Haenel with tape. The first set of twenty worked perfectly. On the second set, I removed the tape. The first round charged fine and ejected fine but round two jammed on feeding leaving it nicely bent so that the bolt would not close. The exact same result occurred two more times. At that point, I removed the magazine and put the tape back on. After that, the rest of the magazine went off without a hitch. 80 (77 when you figure in the three destroyed rounds) rounds does not reliability make but the initial results are promising. Alright, let's look at some pictures and I'll show you why I think the SSD magazines that came with my rifle are pretty much scrap.

    First though, let's look at some markings. SSD production has no manufacturing mark but is marked "MP44":






    DDR production is marked "1001" one side and "MP44" on the other. 1001 is a common mark seen on various Eastie produced firearm bits including Lugers, PP's, P38's and K98K's. It's probably on other stuff that I haven't seen too. Some say 1001 is a manufacturing code associated with the old Walther plant renamed the Ernst Thälmann Werk under GDR occupation. Others say no. I don't know exactly which plant it represents but I do know that it means it was made by the East Germans. That's good enough for me. Enough talk. Pictures please:






    Haenel:






    A little better picture showing the E/37 waffenamt a bit clearer:



    Notice in the pictures above that the "MP44" stamp is distinctly different on all three.


    Some pictures showing the dimples in relation to the bottom of the magazine well when locked in place.

    SSD:



    Note how low they are. The side to side play is negligible. That never seems to be an issue no matter who made them but the front to rear movement is SLOPPY. Both magazines look and fit identical. I have not tried the tape trick yet to get rid of the movement (I will though) but, as will be explained later, I still don't think they would work correctly.


    East German:



    Minimal clearance between dimples and bottom of magazine well. Minimal movement, no slop.


    Haenel:



    Looks just like the DDR magazine but just as sloppy as the SSD magazines. Again, ten strips of cellophane tape on the front of the magazine eliminates all slop.


    While I personally believe that the vast majority of the PRT44 was made using original dies and molds, I think the magazine side plates were 100% reverse engineered and possible the body too. If the body was made using original dies, it was done poorly. As evidence for my side plate theory look at the following picture:



    From left to right we have Eastie, SSD and Haenel. Notice the little reinforcement hump above where the magazine catch engages. On the DDR and Haenel, that bump is rectangular and identical. But on the SSD it is square. Interesting.


    The dimples are different too. Here is the Haenel:



    Notice that the top of the dimple is sharp and flat. In fact, the stamping pricess has pierced the side plate. The DDR is identical.


    Now take a look at the SSD:



    It looks completely different. From the size to the shape to the fact that the stamping does not pierce the steel, it's just different.


    I keep talking about putting tape on the Haenel magazine to get rid of the rock. Here is what that looks like:



    The DDR is on top for comparison. It isn't pretty but if you are careful with how long you make the strips, they can't be seen when the magazine is seated. The tape just acts as a shim. It's kind of a rig job I guess but it works and I don't plan on using this in battle! When the tape gets too ragged, just slap some more on there. My tape is longer than it needs to be but I just put it on there for testing.


    Here we see the front top of all four magazines showing the cut outs for bullet clearance:



    From left to right we have SSD, SSD, DDR and Haenel. Notice that the cut out is different on both SSD magazines. That's kinda' weird if you ask mebeing that they are made in the same factory and only in limited numbers The DDR is different than the Haenel too being pretty much flat at the bottom as opposed to the continuous radius on the Haenel. Also, IIRC, the followers in the SSD's are US made parts. They fit very poorly in the magazine bodies which cannot be good for reliability.
     

    Combloc

    Stop Negassing me!!!!!
    Nov 10, 2010
    7,212
    In a House
    Here we see an SSD on the left compared to the DDR:







    Notice that the follower on the SSD does not reach the front of the body and there is a little nub sticking out the front of the follower. If you try to twist the follower in the DDR and Haenel magazines, they do not move around in there. But on the SSD magazines, you can twist the follower quite a bit and they "click" into different positions. As I said, they just don't fit right. Notice too that the left bullet guide (the little humps inside the body) is misshaped on the SSD.


    Here we see some rounds in the magazines, SSD on the left and DDR on the right:



    All kinds of problems with the SSD are becoming apparent. The feed lips point up much more on the SSD as opposed to the more flattened lips on the DDR. This causes the rounds to be held much less securely on the SSD. Notice too that the top round in the DDR is riding ALONG the bullet guide. This is critical to proper feeding. On the SSD the round is riding OVER the bullet guide.


    Here is a closer shot of an SSD:



    And Haenel:



    Again, notice the different geometry of the feed lips and the critical placement of the top round in relation to the bullet guide.


    SSD:



    East German:




    OK.....Why is this bullet guide thingee so important? Take a look at the following photo:



    Here, we see the SSD on the top and the DDR on the bottom. The rounds are in the process of feeding. Notice on the DDR how the guide is BESIDE the round and positioning it toward the centerline of the magazine? Guess what's along the centerline of the magazine........the centerline of the breech. That bullet is being pushed right into the barrel. Now look at the SSD. The round is riding OVER the guide and, while it is still angling in somewhat, it's far off from the centerline. There is a decent to good chance of it hitting the rear of the barrel instead of going into the breech. I can't show it in pictures but the combination of the flattened feed lips and the position of the bullet guide along side the round in the DDR firmly holds it from flopping around as it moves forward. None of this holds true with the SSD magazine. If I turn the DDR magazine upside down with the round in the position shown, the round stays put. If I do the same with the SSD magazine, the round drops free of the magazine. When it comes to magazines, reliability is all about geometry man!!


    Lets look at some more shots showing the bullet guide problem

    This shows the SSD on the left with the round clearly riding over the guide while the DDR on the right is riding along the guide:




    SSD first with DDR second:





    They don't really even look like they are for the same rifle.


    Here is a different angle. The SSD is shown first and the DDR is second:





    Notice how much more the SSD is angled up. So, not only is it NOT pointed IN far enough but it's also pointed UP too much. It's a double whammy!!


    Here, they are shown side by side with the DDR on the left. The difference is telling:



    I took more pictures but by now, you should get the point. The SSD magazines have serious flaws. In my case, they are so bad as to be useless.


    Now lets look at the jams I got when I removed the tape from the Haenel magazine:



    YEOUCH!! Those rounds look like they are in a limbo dance!! This is the result of a magazine that has too much front to rear slop. As the rifle is recoiling and the bolt is going home, your rifle is jumping all over the place and so is your magazine if it isn't secure in the magazine well. If your rifle is moving one way and the sloppy magazine is going the other, the tip of that round isn't feeding straight into the chamber. Instead, it's diving under or flying over the barrel resulting in bent rounds as shown above. There's a lot of force behind that recoil spring thingee!


    Here are five random normal looking ( I think) spent casings:





    This thing chucks rounds out with almost as much force as my HK91. I mean they go zipping down the firing line. They fly more or less flat and in a small arc ranging from straight out the side to a slight angle to the rear. I have no idea whether or not this is a normal ejection pattern but it's the one I have. If you have an MP44, let me know what your ejection pattern is please.

    So......to recap this post. In my case, the SSD magazines are essentially trash. They don't fit in the rifle correctly, rounds don't fit in the them correctly and they make my rifle a jammomatic. They are useless to me. I bought one WWII magazine and one DDR magazine. Both seem to have fixed the jamming issue but the WWII one needs to be shimmed for fit to work properly.

    I am currently at 234 rounds. Next up is to send the rifle off to the MP44 Wizard so that he can reinforce the bottom of the receiver, correct the hammer hitting the bottom of the receiver and generally go over the rifle looking for potential problems. After that is more rounds down the pipe to see if anything breaks. Meanwhile, I'm looking for a WWII bolt to replace the possibly over hardened SSD one. All of this is expensive and I'm nearly out of ammo at the moment so testing will be on hold for a but until I can restock. That's where I'm at and I'm optimistic.
     
    Jul 1, 2012
    5,711
    Pretty fascinating analysis of the magazines!
    sounds like you have a fighting chance now to get this up and running reliably.
     

    Combloc

    Stop Negassing me!!!!!
    Nov 10, 2010
    7,212
    In a House
    WoW!!! I haven't posted in this thread since October 9th of 2017...….almost three years!!! There is a reason for that. On Friday, June 22 of 2018, I had the rifle out at the range with a friend of mine. We took the M249, FG42 and MP44 because he had never shot any of those and wanted to try them out. The M249 and FG42 both worked flawlessly that day but we only got 28 rounds through the MP44 before, at round 427, the trigger went dead and the rifle wouldn't fire.

    Upon disassembly, I discovered that the disconnector had sheared in half:

    Looks nice doesn't it? As has been discussed already, some of the parts on the PTR44 are prone to failure due to overhardening. Some of the trigger components were made in the United States for 922 compliance including, if I remember correctly, the hammer, sear and disconnector. They are also prone to failure. Well.....mine failed.

    No problem. SSD has imported some new made parts for these rifles and says that they are now properly hardened so I ordered one. It is shown below along with the part of the broken original still pinned to the sear:


    I also found a new old stock original one for 22 buckaroonies so I bought that too. It's all about options my friends. In the series of pictures below, the WWII one is on the right and the new made SSD is on the left:











    They look pretty much identical but I decided to have the vintage one installed simply because I know they have a good track record.


    While I was at it, I bought a WWII vintage hammer too:







    The sear still looked pretty good to me so I decided to reuse that. I hope it wasn't a mistake. Time will tell I guess.


    Then I stopped and did nothing. Why? Because I was worried. I knew who I wanted to work on the rifle. I had contacted him (I'll call him the MP44 Wizard because he wants to remain anonymous but his name is known in certain circles) and he was willing to take on the work. The problem was that he lived 700 miles away and I was worried about shipping the rifle that far. You see, with the exception of the STG45, there is no other rifle on this planet that I've desired to own than the MP44. From the time I discovered the rifle as a kid, I WANTED one. Consequently, there seemed to be a curse keeping me from getting one. I won't go into all the details; you'll just have to trust me that I always wanted one SO BAD it seemed that the universe aligned against me getting one. When I found this one, I refused to let the guy ship it. I drove hours away to meet him at an FFL and have it transferred rather then trust shipping it. I just KNEW that something would go wrong if I did.

    Well, here I was with a busted rifle and the guy who I trusted to repair it 700 miles away. Finally, after sitting on it for almost 11 months, I decided I had no choice. I bought a case to ship it in and wrapped it so well it could withstand a nuclear blast. In late Aril or early May of 2019, I sent it Registered Mail and insured it for way more than it was worth because I knew that the higher the value with registered, the more care the USPS extends in regards to shipping. EVERY SINGLE PERSON that touched it during transit had to sign for it and it would not touch automated machinery. It simply could not get lost. Save a natural disaster, it would arrive safely. The day I sent it off, I told my honey:

    "You watch.....his shop will catch fire."

    It arrived safely a few days later and the Wizard began working his magic. We discussed what was to be done on the phone. I had included a typed list of issues I had noted (we'll cover all that a bit later) and we discussed the remedies for those issues. All was going well and he expected to have the rifle ready to send back to me by the end of July.

    Then his shop caught fire...….while he was working on my rifle.

    My rifle was saved but I still felt TERRIBLE for the Wizard. Obviously, all work stopped in his shop but luckily he only lost half of the shop. His livelihood was not destroyed, only set back. I'm not going to go into details because that's nobody's business but happily, it's hard to keep a good man down and the Wizard was up and running again this spring. About a month ago, I got a call saying my rifle was nearing completion and would soon be ready to ship. Not wishing to temp fate further, I asked if it would be possible for me to drive the 700 miles to pick up the rifle in person rather than have it shipped. "No problem." was the answer. "While you're here, we can head to the range and shoot some machine guns."

    I called a childhood friend of mine who lives almost exactly halfway to my destination and asked if I could stay the night. He was happy to oblige. So I stayed the night at his place and continued the journey the next day with his son as a passenger. He had just graduated from high school and is leaving for the Marines in the fall so I took him along as my graduation present. What better graduation gift can you give a kid than a day at the range with machine guns?? There isn't one.

    Sooooo after over a year and about 750 miles driving, the day came that I finally got my MP44 back. The Wizard had put 140 rounds through it during repair and testing and we put another 80 rounds down the barrel that day. I had one stovepipe upon ejection but no problem otherwise. That brings the total rounds thus far to 647. In the next post, we'll look at the rifle and discuss what was done to it but I want to finish up this post with a few pictures from the range on the day I picked it up.

    First up is a picture of something I had wondered about for a long time but have never seen a picture of, the MP44 stacking rod/Haunebu craft transmission antenna in use:

    It's a pointless feature reminiscent of a long gone past but it still looks neato. My rifle is at the far right. The one in the pyramid facing the camera is a late war original and the other one in the pyramid is a parts kit assembled to a PTR44 receiver that was one of the 50 out of 200 imported deemed not suitable for sale. It had been mangled during conversion after import and the wizard bought the receiver and made it work. The one laying on the ground is another late war original rifle.

    Here is my buddy's son, Clay, shooting an MP44 that the Wizard made a scope mount for:

    He had no trouble at all clanging the gong at 200 yards. The Marines are going to induct one hell of a great recruit with this one. He's one of the BEST 17 year old kids I've ever had the privilege of knowing and I've known him since he's been born.
    By the way, if you look VERY carefully at the FAL in the rack, you might notice that it looks a little odd. That's because it's been modified to shoot 7.92x33 Kurz cartridges by the Wizard. I got to shoot it and I gotta say, IMO, it's what the FAL should have been. I tried to get the Wizard to sell it to me but no such luck!!


    Here is the Wizard trying out my CETME LVS:

    As is the case with everyone who shoots a MarColMar CETME, he was extremely impressed with the rifle.


    Clay shot hundreds of rounds through an Egyptian Port Said SMG (a license built Carl Gustaf) and took to it like a duck to water:

    Dig that brass cased Norinco 9mm circa 1992. I bought 1000's of rounds of that stuff back in the day and its Excellent ammunition.

    We also had a chance to shoot an Ultimax 100 MK II designed by none other than James Sullivan:





    The Wizard has a Class II license and rewelded this from a parts kit. These things are exceedingly rare in this country and I was stoked to get the chance to shoot one. The Wizard told me I could take as many pictures as I wanted and I would have LOVED to document this jobber but it takes me 3-4 hours to get the pictures I need to really do a firearm justice and we only had so much time so I chose to pull the trigger rather than click the shutter. We were at the range for 5 hours before heading back home. That made it a roughly 22 hour day from out of bed to back to my friends house but it was worth every minute!


    That's it for this post. In the next one, we'll look at my MP44 now that I have it home and go over exactly what was done to it. I'm heading to the range again tomorrow morning and I trust that it won't fail to please. Thanks for your time and I'll see you soon!
     
    Last edited:

    Combloc

    Stop Negassing me!!!!!
    Nov 10, 2010
    7,212
    In a House
    In all of the following pictures, we're only going to look at the rifle as it is now. If you want to compare the various details to how it looked before upgrade, you'll only need to refer back to pictures I've already posted.

    ALrighty, here's the rifle after I got home and cleaned it from the range trip:

    When I bought this thing, I knew things were going to go wrong with it and I had thought about just sending it out for upgrades right off the bat. BUT, the Wizard told me that I should just shoot it until something broke because I might discover things in the meantime that I wanted done that I might not think of initially. That turned out to be sage advice because by the time the disconnector broke, I had discovered quite a list of things that just weren't right.

    We will now go over them one by one starting at the muzzle:

    Big deal....it's a muzzle. Welllll, it turned out that it was a big deal. In order for this thing to hit center of target at 100 yards, I had to have the front sight pushed all the way to one side (I forget which). And when I say "all the way", I MEAN all the way. It was hitting the sight hood and there was zero movement left. What was weird was the fact that the sight base appeared to be standing up straight. In order for it to shoot point of aim with the front sight centered, the base would have to be canted so much that it would look silly. Long story short, it turns out that the crown was not cut right. It LOOKED fine but no dice. The picture above shows it after re-crowning.

    And here is where the front sight sits in the base now:

    I had no problem ringing the gong at 200 yards so it's plenty zeroed for my old eyes.

    While we're up here, notice the muzzle nut lock pin:

    That didn't work right. If you pushed it in to remove the muzzle nut, it would stick in the sight base. The only way to get it to pop back out was to shoot the rifle and the resulting recoil would cause it to pop back out. That's not a huge deal but it bothered me. Now it's been corrected and it works just as it should. In order to repair it though the front sight base had to come off. That seems like a bunch of work for such a small thing.

    Well...….the sight base had to come off anyway because it was loose on the barrel. It wasn't super loose but you could rotate it side to side with not much effort. I noticed it early on when holding the muzzle while loosening the gas plug. As the rifle left the factory, the only thing holding the base on the barrel was a pin. This was true during the war and it was true when this was built. Even back in the 40's loose front sights were a complaint. So, the sight is now soldered in place just as it would be on a K98K. Additionally, a new slightly oversized pin was manufactured and installed. Its as secure as it can possible be now:

    Notice the discoloration going on in the bluing. It's looking good!!!


    By the way, I'm starting to get some dings and bluing loss on the rifle. The more the better. As an example, here is the front bottom of the handguard:


    And a but of edge wear at the front of the receiver:

    Of course, these piddley things are nowhere NEAR enough. I carry it all over the place and am somewhat rough on it in an effort to get nicks and scratches. I also go over it with a rag every time I pick it up. I'm getting some dings in the stock now too and some dents in the metal that I have no idea how they got there. When I get to less than 50% bluing and some nice brown patina, I'll be satisfied. Unfortunately, I have a long way to go! What I really need to do is go on more overnight hiking trips and carry it with me. Yep.....I'm nuts.


    Next up was a magazine issue. I have three original magazines; an East German, an FXO (Haenel) and an MP45 marked gqm (Loch & Hartenberger). The East German and MP45 marked magazines fit nicely in the magazine well and function fine. But the FXO had a lot of front to rear slop which caused feeding issues. In order to fix that, a shim was cut and silver soldered to the front of the magazine:

    It cannot be seen when seated in the rifle and now it has minimal movement. As a result, it functions just fine now.


    While the East German magazine worked fine, it had active rust and was pitted. I gave up trying to stop the rust and asked Mr. Wizard to just refinish it and be done with it. He wanted to make sure that the rust was totally eliminated so he blasted it, parked it, blasted it again and parked it again. He may have even done it a third time but I forget now. Whatever the case, he was thorough! He made it a nice dark grey to almost black color. Below, it is on the left compared to an original wartime blued example on the right:



    And a detail showing just how pitted it is under the finish:

    I hated to have that done because I like the East German jobbers better than the wartime ones because I'm a big Combloc fan. I would have liked to have preserved the finish but it was for the best. Now I can use it and stop obsessing over the rust.


    I told the Wizard to go over the entire rifle with a critical eye and to fix, replace or modify anything that didn't look right to him. He decided that he didn't like the look of the rear sight leaf fixing pin and replaced it with one he fabricated. I thought it looked fine before but I was wrong. Now it looks like it was manufactured and installed with the care only a true craftsman can impart.....because it was:




    On the MP44 the gas tube is anchored to neither the gas block nor the receiver. It just floats in between the two. As a result, it's normal for it to slide fore and aft just a hair. It's not a lot but it does move. When installed, ribs stamped into the handguard snap into corresponding valleys on the gas tube and lock the two parts together as a unit. Consequently, the handguard will slide fore and aft too. The Wizard does not like this. He says it makes the rifle feel cheap. To eliminate this movement, he made a little ring for each of his rifles that just snaps over the barrel behind the gas block. He did the same for mine and now there is zero movement:


    This dude is all about the details. That's EXACTLY the kind of person you want working on a rifle.


    The previously discussed hammer and disconnector was installed:



    As insurance, the slot in the bottom of the receiver had a plate welded over it and then just enough of it was machined away for the hammer to pass. I'm told that this adds quite a bit of rigidity to the receiver. I'll take his word for it because he has CLEARLY forgotten more about these rifles than I'll ever learn.






    The ejection port cover didn't latch very securely. Sometimes just flicking the outside of it with your finger would cause it to pop open. The detent notch was cleaned up and deepened and now it stays closed properly:



    A urethane buffer was installed inside the stock ferrule:

    You sometimes see original MP44's with cracked stocks. This can be caused by the bolt carrier banging into the stock ferrule at the end of its rearward movement. The force is transferred into the wood causing a split. This buffer will most likely eliminate that possibility. But it must be said; we're dealing with wood though so there are no absolute guarantees.


    The last thing that was done is, in my opinion, the most important for keeping these rifles alive well into the future. That is replacing the factory trigger group pins, which were peened in place, with new ones that are held in place with circlips so that you can easily disassemble and reassemble the trigger group should the need arise. I believe that the original setup was done as a wartime expedient to simplify the design and speed up production. That's fine when you are using your rifle as a tool that you simply turn in to an armorer should something go awry. He has the necessary tools to refit those pins without distorting the stamped metal lower or mucking up the bearings. I don't have that equipment though and I guarantee your average gunsmith doesn't either. I understand why SSD did it the old way too. They make REPRODUCTIONS (hint to any company that is looking at making such a thing).
    But I explained to the Wizard that I "want to shoot the hell out of this thin, not stare at it". If something goes wrong in the future I want to know that I can personally disassemble it and work on it. This easily removeable pin solution is simple and elegant. By the way, this wasn't my idea. The Wizard suggested it and I enthusiastically jumped on it. I didn't care what the cost was, I want that done above all else.
    Here's the right side of the trigger housing showing the new made hammer pin, trigger in and sear pin:


    And a closeup of those pins:

    The pins I'm talking about are the three with slightly dished heads. This reproduces the look of original peened in place pins. "Peened" may not be the right word. Maybe they were "squeezed" instead. Whatever the original process, it expanded the both ends of the pins to lock them in their bearings. Now, they are ever so slightly oversized on this end so no circlip is needed. Note the circlip in the lower left of the picture. This is a factory original clip installed on the end of the safety lever axle.


    Here is the left side of the trigger housing showing the circlips:


    A closeup:

    Notice how the circlips mimic the factory one on the other side. It's all about details. Even though this retaining system isn't "correct", it sure blends in nicely and, most importantly, it allows easy repairs should that be necessary in the future. I simply could not be more satisfied with this work!


    The last problem was the extractor pin. It should almost drop out but it was in so tight I couldn't get it out with a hammer and punch. Now it comes out just like it should. I didn't take a picture of that because it's just a pin so there's nothing much to see. But I can show you a picture of what we discovered when we took the rifle apart for inspection:


    Notice that part of the bolt has broken off below the very front of the extractor. Mr. Wizard had not noticed that before and I could tell that it upset him. He said it must have happened during his testing but he had no idea when or how. I told him not to worry about it because it was surely nothing he did. As everyone knows, many of the PTR44 bolts are overhardened and brittle. Maybe that's the case with mine too. It's also entirely possible that I weakened that area when I was using a pin punch and hammer trying to remove the previously too tight extractor pin. I just had it laying on the bench with my honey holding it from moving when I was tapping and that broken off piece probably took more punishment than it should have at the time. Whatever the case, I suspect that this bolt will probably eventually self destruct. What I really need is an original to replace it with. If any of you folks has one that they are willing to sell at a reasonable price (I simply will not pay the ridiculous prices some morons are asking on gunbroker) please look me up. I'd be very much obliged!

    That's it for modifications and replacements. I know what you are thinking and I agree. For as much money as these rifles cost, the number of problems and faulty bits is a disgrace. I 100% agree with you but I DO think it's worth the time, money and effort because the alternative is an original that will cost you $25,000 or more AND you have to register it on a Form 4. I don't regret my journey for a second and I'll jump right in line if and when SSD brings more into the country. Truth be told, they are currently working on that and they say that the hardness issues are a thing of the past. While I truthfully don't know if that's the case or not, I must admit that I'd be willing to gamble. Call me crazy if you want.....you'd be right. I always have been and I always will be!
     
    Last edited:

    Combloc

    Stop Negassing me!!!!!
    Nov 10, 2010
    7,212
    In a House
    I'd like to talk a bit about the backdrop I used in the previous post. That's not reproduction cloth but it's not WWII vintage either. In fact, it's a Czechoslovakian shelter half made very shortly after WWII using leftover German equipment. The pattern looks identical to what collectors call Sumpfmuster 44 because it was manufactured using Sumpfmuster 44 rollers. The colors look a little off partly because it's over 70 years old, well used and faded but mostly because the Czech's used their own dyes to make it the colors they wanted. They apparently made very few of these and I found this one in the Czech Republic. Outside of nerds like myself, these things are all but unknown. Here are a couple pictures of the whole thing:



    Unlike a German one that's triangular, the Czechs decided to go with a parallelogram.


    Here's the Czech on the right compared to 1950's West German Sumpfmuster on the left:



    The sling is an original postwar specimen too. They are usually sold as East German and they may be. Both the Czechs and East Germans used the MP44 for some years after the war until more modern arms came online. Two versions of the sling seem to exist. One has a cross hatch patters similar to that seen on WWII vintage K98K slings. I believe these to be East German made. The other, shown on my rifle has no cross hatch pattern but is slightly pebbled. My belief is that these are Czechoslovakian made.


    The Czech's not only used leftover wartime M43 ammunition in their repatriated MP44's but, like the East Germans, they made their own too.
    Here are six boxes of Czech issued ammunition:

    The two upper ones on the left are leftover WWII ammunition pecked into Czech marked boxes and the other four were contain rounds made in 1946 by Sellier & Bellot. The label on five of the boxes translates as:

    15 pcs.
    7.92 mm short cartridge M43
    for submachinegun - N
    Manufacture date (year)
    Sorted : January 1955
    Use within (6 months)

    The sixth box is hard to read but it has similar information plus what appears to be a bullet weight minus the resort and use within information. Notice that the label on that box is very similar to wartime German labels too down to the blue stripe.
    Here's a closeup of that box in case you can read it better than I can:



    And here is one of the other boxes:

    The repack label is glued over the earlier, original, label.


    A couple of the boxes have some writing in pencil:



    All of the cardboard boxes shown, while Czech labeled, are actually just left over wartime boxes. Each is embossed inside the tuck flap with a 1944/45 date and manufacturer code. Here is a random example:



    Here is one of the Sellier & Bellot rounds:

    Just as you commonly see on WWII vintage rounds, the steel case is washed in a green lacquer.


    The head stamp is clearly marked "SB" (Sellier & Bellot) and dated 1946:



    This last picture gives a general overview of Czech Automatic rifles from 1945-1961:

    Technically, there should be a VZ52 (officially made from 1952-56 in 7.62x45) in there too between the M44 and the VZ 52/57 (1957-59 in 7.62x39). Still you get the point. The VZ58 changed the furniture from beech wood to wood chip infused bakelite in 1961 I think (correct me if I'm wrong please). So, as I have presented the rifle here, it's posing as a Czechoslovakian. I wish I had some Czech magazine pouches for it but no such luck. Maybe someday and maybe not!


    Okiedokie. Unless something changes, that's it for my coverage of the SSD/PTR44. Unless I find a bolt, something breaks or something else happens that I think is noteworthy, I'm done. Thanks for spending some time reading my drivel and I'll see you on the next one. Bye for now!

    P.S. Thanks Mom. I love you.
     

    Combloc

    Stop Negassing me!!!!!
    Nov 10, 2010
    7,212
    In a House
    I recently picked up an interesting late war magazine for this rifle of an oddball design you don't see much information about so I figured we might as well take a look at it.

    The vast majority of MP44 magazine bodies are similar in construction to an MP5 jobber in that they are two halves welded together along a front and rear seam. For reasons unknown to me, very late in the war, a new design of body was introduced. It was two parts too but instead of two halves, it consisted of a large part folded unto a "U" which made up the front and both sides of the body. Then a rear panel was spot welded on to complete the box. Sound confusing? It's not really and it will all make sense after you check out the text and pictures that follow.

    We'll start with left and right side general views:



    If you collect MP44 schtuff, you'll immediately recognize what you are looking at but non-nerds will think it looks like every other MP44 magazine on the planet.


    In this photo, the difference becomes obvious:

    On the left is a typical MP44 magazine (only it's stamped "MP45" because the manufacturer screwed up) and on the right is the oddball. Notice that the one on the left has 5 reinforcement ribs while the one on the right only has four plus a little short one at the bottom running perpendicular to the others. The fifth rib was omitted to allow for the back to be folded around and welded in place.


    Here's the other side showing the spot welds a little better:



    Below is a front detail shot showing the welded seam on a typical magazine compared to the lack of a seam on the oddball:



    Similarly, we see the rear seam on a typical compared to no seam on the oddball:



    The side plates are identical:



    Typical magazine:



    Oddball:

    It should be obvious now why the fifth reinforcement rib was omitted.


    Here, we have removed the floorplate to get a look at how the rear of the magazine folds around the sides:



    It is important to note that, not only the side plates, but the floor plate, follower and spring are interchangeable between the two designs. Only the body itself is constructed differently. Why this was done is unknown. The manufacturer is not certain either but it was almost certainly located in Czechoslovakia because post war Czech marked/manufactured ones are often encountered. Let's look at some markings.

    First, all magazines of this design that I have ever seen are stamped on the left side "St G 44". This nomenclature was adopted in late October of 1944:



    On the right side is found the manufacturer's code and an inspection (German wartime) or acceptance proof (post war Czech):

    "qlw" is the manufacturer. There is some debate over who exactly this is and I have no interest in adding to the debate. What I will say is that I believe the factory was most likely in Czechoslovakia. Below that is, on this example, an "E" followed by a Czech rampant lion and the year of manufacture "46". If this magazine were assembled during the war, it would have a Waffenamt instead. Some are also seen with a Waffenamt overstamped by the Czech mark. In my opinion, it is clear that a Waffenamt means wartime production, an overstamp means wartime production repatriated and a Czech stamp only means Czech manufactured. The fact that "qlw" is on there tells me (my opinion only) that the magazine was made from left over wartime parts but assembled by the Czechs postwar.


    This magazine was numbered to the rifle it was issued with:

    This makes sense as MP44's are often magazine sensitive.


    The floor plate on this magazine bears wartime marks too but no Waffenamt.





    The follower is stamped with a Waffenamt. This tells us that, without question, they were using left over parts.

    "gqm" is known to be Loch and Hartenberger.


    I find it very interesting that an aluminum HK33 magazine made decades later has a similar reinforcing rib at the bottom:



    Those nutty Germans...….the more things change, the more they stay the same. A late war STG44 magazine design compared to an HK33 from the 1970's:



    Alrighty. Carry on.
     

    Combloc

    Stop Negassing me!!!!!
    Nov 10, 2010
    7,212
    In a House
    Today, I had the opportunity to do some hardness testing on some bolts and bolt carriers, both old and new. There has always been a lot of speculation about the PTR 44 parts being overly hard to the point of brittleness. Some time ago now, an SSD representative told me that, back when the PTR 44's were being manufactured, the hardening of the bolts and carriers was done by a contracted firm and quality control was lacking. I was also told that these parts are now properly hardened in shop by SSD so there are new issues. Well, today, I went to visit an old timer machinist friend who just happens to have a meticulously maintained, vintage, Wilson hardness tester.

    We tested four bolt carriers. All four were tested in the same area, the bolt grasping claw directly below the reinforcement webbing. A typical test dimple is shown below:


    Results are reported using the Rockwell C Scale. The higher the number, the harder the part.
    From left to right:


    Manufacturer.........................................................Hardness

    Haenel (FXO)..........................................................24C
    Erma (ayf)...............................................................33C
    Recently Manufactured SSD..............................38C
    2009 SSD
    (PTR imported rifle serial number 0779).......57C

    I think the numbers pretty much speak for themselves. The bolt carrier for rifle 0779 is significantly over hardened, most likely to the point of being brittle. In other words, if you use it, it's a ticking time bomb. The new made SSD carrier, although harder than either of the two tested originals is most likely just fine for long term use.


    All five bolts were tested in the same area as well: the center top of the surface behind the unlocking claws:



    The tested bolts from left to right:


    Manufacturer.......................................................Hardness

    E/37 (Haenel)........................................................60C
    Unknown Original
    (Marked 1 A and an acceptance mark).........59C
    Recently manufactured SSD.............................56C
    2009 SSD
    (PTR imported rifle serial number 0779).......59C
    2009 SSD
    (PTR imported rifle serial number 0880).......60C

    The PTR imported bolts surprised me. I've heard of some of them breaking (although more often the carrier) but the two tested today fall right in line with the two tested originals. The recent manufacture SSD bolt tested right in line with the originals too.


    I noticed something with regards to the Haenel carrier. It appears to have been repaired after haven broken post forging but prior to finish machining. Let's take a look.

    Here we see obvious welding at the inside right front of the hammer clearance slot:


    Outside, we see weld porosity:


    But the only present machining appear to be from original manufacture:



    Similarly, when we look at the inside left front of the hammer clearance slot, we see more weld:


    Again, we see porosity on the outside:


    But again, the only machine marks present appear to be from original manufacture:


    Markings on this carrier:


    Now, I'm far from an expert on original MP44 parts and my experience is limited. Some of you folks have been playing with this stuff for half a century. Have any of you ever seen an original carrier that appeared to be repaired during the original manufacture process? Whatever the case, I think it's VERY interesting!
     
    Last edited:

    Combloc

    Stop Negassing me!!!!!
    Nov 10, 2010
    7,212
    In a House
    It would appear I spoke too son about the new made SSD bolt carrier. Today, I was out at the range with a couple old friends enjoying the late summer sun. I figured it would be nice to take the PTR44 out since I've been messing with bits and pieces lately. The first 31 rounds went well with only one stoppage and then we came to round 32. I pulled the trigger, the rifle fired, the bolt carrier jammed to the rear and the unlocking claw from the bolt carrier fell out on the bench. The bolt was still in battery and would not move. Nice.........

    So, I carefully disassembled the rifle and pulled the broken carrier out. the bolt was locked in battery and I'm scratching my head wondering "what the hell is the problem here?" Then I look in through the rear of the receiver and see the problem. Somehow, some way, the firing pin has come out the rear of the bolt and ended up going back forward into the ejector groove in the bolt (no idea how) wedging itself between the bolt body and the ejector. No wonder the bolt is locked in battery......it can't rise. There is a firing pin in the way. Now.....you tell me how in the world the firing pin ended up there! Anywho, it took me about 20 minutes of fiddling around with my fingers and a Swiss Army knife before I managed to dislodge the firing pin. Once it came out, the bolt lifted up easily and slid to the rear, ejecting the undamaged case. I was shooting factory loaded PPU ammo and noticed nothing out of the ordinary so I'm sure this is just a simple case of bolt carrier failure. When I bought this, the SSD rep told me there is a lifetime warranty on the part so it's ok. Hopefully he has a replacement available.

    Total rounds on the carrier before failure, 792.

    I reassembled the rifle using a spare wartime carrier I have (Erma Werke) and hand cycled the action. Everything seemed to be fine but I was finished shooting for the day. This evening, when I clean the rifle, I'll carefully inspect everything for damage but I think it's good to go.

    Here's a picture of the broken part:


    Now I gotta' go look up that SSD guy
     

    Combloc

    Stop Negassing me!!!!!
    Nov 10, 2010
    7,212
    In a House
    No damage other than the carrier. SSD is sending a new one no charge. An original would be best though. I have two. One needs fitting for sure and the other needs testing. I'll get there.
     

    Combloc

    Stop Negassing me!!!!!
    Nov 10, 2010
    7,212
    In a House
    Alrighty, it's time for an update. I contacted D-K Production Group, the company that sells SSD parts in the United States. Within two days, I had a new replacement carrier (a $700 part) at no cost. All they asked was that I return the broken one. Yes, the part should not have failed but, be that as it might, I have to say that the customer service is stellar.

    The one that was sent looks great and required no fitting, sliding in the receiver just as it should. I prefer it in the white because I like the contrast but beggars can't be choosers!
















    Now, will this one last? I have no way of knowing without shooting the hell out of it. That most likely won't happen because I have an original Erma Werke carrier installed and, pending test firing to make sure it operates properly, I see no need not to use it. Wartime parts are generally known to be reliable and of good quality.


    Test firing brings up another subject. I'm in my 50's now and my eyes aren't what they were when I bought this rifle. I used to be able to shoot it at 200M fine using open sights but those days are gone. I can either wear my glasses and see the target but not the sights or I can ditch the glasses and see the sights but not the target. Some folks lamented the fact that SSD installed a scope rail on the rifles saying they were never mass produced that way. But some did have a rail if only for testing and I personally am grateful it's on there because an optic is the only way I can actually aim the rifle anymore! That will be the subject of the next post.
     

    Combloc

    Stop Negassing me!!!!!
    Nov 10, 2010
    7,212
    In a House
    As stated in my previous post, I'm getting older and my days of shooting at any distance with iron sights are in the rear view mirror. I can still shoot steel plates at 100M but I do so by not wearing my glasses and aiming at the center of the blob. I can get a hit but I can't shoot for accuracy. So, optics are now a must for me if I want to do more than just giggle at hearing the muzzle blast.

    When the MP44 was being developed, some rifles had a scope rail spot welded to the receiver so that the same mount used on the G/K43 rifle could be fitted. Trials with an optic were less than satisfactory so the idea was dropped and the rifle entered mass production sans a rail. However, some rifles with a rail were encountered in the field and it is known that the ZG 1229 Vampir NV sight was fitted to the MP44 so clearly a limited number must have been produced other than for trials. The fact is, we'll most likely never know production numbers but it was most certainly vanishingly small. Whatever the case, SSD decided to reproduce the rail and install it on their rifles. I'm glad they did too because it means I can fit an optic on mine and continue to enjoy it as I get older. Unfortunately, there are two problems, price and dimensions.

    First up is price. An original scope and mount is expensive. I used to have one when I had a G43. Man, was that thing accurate. I had enjoyed it for about 500 rounds when I had a pierced primer. The rifle was unharmed but the incident really brought home the fact that the G43 is very fragile and prone to breakage. I was afraid of destroying it if I continued to shoot it so I separated the scope rig from the rifle and sold them separately. Other than the rubber eye cup, the scope rig was 100% original parts and included the scope (a crystal clear Voigtlander), mount (Walther), bands with screws and windage knob cover. I sold it for $3000. Now, I have no interest in tying up that kind of geedus to use on a rifle that is a reproduction to start with. What to do?

    An alternative is to use reproduction parts to build a scope rig. The optic is not the problem. Several years ago, Meopta in the Czech Republic, who made the ZF4 during the war under the name Opticotechna GmbH, broke out their old machinery and made a bunch of them for the reenactor market. They are of excellent Quality and can be had for around $500. I have on mounted on my FG42 and it's a thing of beauty, robust and reliable. Additionally, the eye cup, windage knob and sunshade are available as well made reproductions too. They are close enough to look the part but just different enough that they can't be passed off as original if you know what to look for. The Meopta scope is likewise made slightly different. The mechanics are identical but the markings are slightly different and the lenses are coated, something that was not done during the war. The problem is the mount and rings. A very few reproductions are properly made but the vast majority are essentially junk. That's a rabbit hole I'd rather no go down. But there is another alternative........

    At the end of the war, the Czechs found themselves with a massive amount of German equipment left lying around. Additionally, during the war, Czechoslovakia had been a major manufacturing area for the German military. So, for a while, the Czechs used German equipment. They even went so far as to employ the ME262 jet fighter in their airforce! But that's way off topic. What's on topic is that Czech army used the G43 rifle as a marksman's rifle for a time. Not only did they use left over ZF4 scopes, but they also refurbished some and even made new ones marked as a "Vz43" (Model 43). Similarly, they used left over mounts and, because they made mounts during the war, they continued making news ones with Czech markings. This is the ticket if you want the best Quality rig for range use. All components are made to original specifications because they are made by an original manufacturer. And because they are Czech marked, they lack the monetary value associated with German marked components which means you can save a PILE of cash. The problem is locating them. Even though they aren't worth much, they are far rarer than wartime produced equivalents. The only way is through patience, persistence, and most important of all, luck.

    This past January I got very lucky. I stumbled across a Czech rig that had not been messed with. The refurbished ZF4 was cloudy and the turrets were frozen but the CZ made mount was pristine and the bands with screws were original. I paid $450.




    I received it assembled but I disassembled it to inspect everything and get the scope sent off for refurbishment by Don Miller of Optihaus who is considered to be the best man for the job on this continent. In the first picture, you can see the lined out markings. The scope was made in Czechoslovakia during the war by Opticotechna. "ZF K 43" marking tells us it's a later war production unit. During rework after the war, all of the original markings were struck through and new markings applied on the bottom of the body (2nd picture) As such, they cannot be seen when the optic is installed on the mount. We can see the Czech "rampant lion" acceptance proof, a new serial number and the "U45" refurbishment marking telling us it was rebuilt in 1945.

    I sent the scope off to Don in late February excited about having it back in time for some nice warm weather zeroing so I could do some long range testing. Well, things don't always go according to plan. Don is a busy man and he works on scopes at his pace when he has time to do so. Long story short, I didn't get my scope back until October 19th but it was well worth the wait. It's now crystal clear and the once frozen turrets now work perfectly. He even threw in a reproduction eye cup and windage knob cover and he only charged me $150 for the service. I sent him a Check for $200 and would have happily paid more. I'd recommend him for ZF4 work to anyone so long as they are patient. His email address is optikhaus@yahoo.com

    So, I have a grand total of $650 wrapped up in the scope and mount and another $60 for a sunshield from Darrin Weaver at Historicalparts.com. A comparable wartime rig would be well over $3000 and it wouldn't be of any better quality. For my purposes (range use) that's one hell of a savings. That takes care of the price problem. Earlier I said there is a dimension problem too but we'll cover that as we look at the pictures of the end result.

    First up, here are general left and right side views of the scope rig mounted on the rifle:



    I really like the pale phosphate finish on the mount. It's so thin it looks almost like a wash that you can still see the bare steel through. It's identical to the German late war phosphate. Whatever the formula was, it seems to have been lost to time as I am unaware of anyone who can reproduce it today.

    Markings at the rear of the mount:

    The lever is swung to the rear locked position showing the word "Pevne" or "fixed". Below that is the serial number. I don't know if this is the mount number, the scope number, or the rifle number. Below that is a CZ manufacturer mark. Some are marked "rid" which was the Czech ordnance code for CZ. I'm not aware of any other manufacturer of these for the Czech military.


    Next are the markings on the middle of the mount:

    Again we see the rampant lion acceptance mark. I assume "E7" is a quality control stamp but I'm not sure. "47" is the year of manufacture.


    When the locking lever is swung forward to the unlocked position, the word "Volne" or "Free" is displayed:



    During refurbishment by the Czechs, coated lenses were used installed:


    Scope assembled to the mount showing the bands and proper length screws. Reproduction screws are almost always too long:

    The windage cap is an almost perfect reproduction.


    Now we come to the dimension problem. Here is the rail on the rifle:

    It looks great, just like the rail you'd see on a G/K43 rifle. The problem is, it's not dimensioned correctly. I've only had the chance to try two original mounts on two PTR44 rifles. Both times, they would not lock down correctly and the mount would literally rock side to side on the rail, making it totally useless for anything other than display. Are all PTR44 rails out of spec? I don't know but I'd bet that they are. Fortunately, there IS a solution. what you need to do is fabricate a shim out of aluminum. In my case, I happened to have one lying around that came from Buddy Hinton. He had them made for use with the Model 1953 scope on the the MAS49 and 49/56 rifles. It turns out one of those shims works out just fine in this application and the scope mount now seems to lock down properly on the rail:

    All you need to do is start the mount on the rifle and work it forward slowly as you insert the shim from the front and push it backwards between the mount and the rail. Now, I haven't had this to the rage yet so I cannot guarantee that the mount will not move. But it locks up rigidly so I am fairly certain it'll work. I'll report my findings when I know for sure.

    Here we see the gap between the mount and the rail:

    The shim fills this space, allowing the mount to properly lock on the rail.


    Not only is the optic useful but it just looks neat mounted on the rifle:


    This last picture is a head on view illustrating the offset position of the optic:

    This created parallax problems during trials. There were also dispersion problems and I assume that will still apply today. My advantage is that I'm not taking this to war. It's all just for fun. I'll report back once I get it to the range.
     
    Last edited:

    Users who are viewing this thread

    Latest posts

    Forum statistics

    Threads
    274,915
    Messages
    7,258,424
    Members
    33,348
    Latest member
    Eric_Hehl

    Latest threads

    Top Bottom