Can someone tell me the lack of factory codes on HSc"s

[donp326]

I have been wondering why Mauser left their logo on the HSc during the war when on P.38 and other arms the three letter code was used.  I would have expected BYF on the HSc instead of Mauser from 1940 or 1941 into 1945.  Was there some reason this was not changed on the HSc?  Warbird or anyone else, what's you thought on this.  I have seen Walther PP's with AC on them so why no BYF code on HSc's. I did'nt see this addressed in the the book on the HSc either.


I posted this in a other thread and go no response.

[jcorl]

The Mauser Logo did change on the HSc during the war years.  There is the first format slide marking style, then a second format slide marking style that started in 1943. 

Jim

[donp326]

OK all I have ever seen is the one on my HSc 1941 has Mauser on the side of the slide the only other ones I have seem the three line slide marking with Mauser on it also. I have seen quite a few pictures of different HSc's but never seen one with a BYF code in Leiu of Mauser.  Do you have one that you could post a picture of here. as I have seen on PP's marked with AC for Walther.

[Warbird]

Jim, Don's question has to do with the German Ordnance Codes and not the Mauser logo.  As to why Mauser didn't use an Ordnance Code on the HSc ... I don't know and I haven't seen any published reason for it.  Perhaps Gerben (Vlim) can pose the question to some of the old-timers in Oberndorf for an answer.

[donp326]

Thanks Warbird when I said Mauser logo I meant the name "Mauser" not he Barrel Logo and as to why Mauser didn't us the Ordinance Codes on the HSc that they used on the P.38's they began producing in late 1942, BYF or SVW in 1945.  I think this is an important issue because of going to the different services these guns should have fallen under the Ordinance Codes directive too.

[Biker86]

I don't think the Sauer 38Hs or the Walther PPKs were marked with an Ordinance Code either. Only about 20,000 of the more than 200,000 Walther PPs made during the war had the AC code. And that didn't start until near the end of the war in late 1944 or early 1945.

The answer to this question may also explain why most of the other German made WWII 7.65mm pistols don't have an Ordinance Code.

[donp326]

Biker86 you may have something there.  I would have thought thought, the folks who were in control of the Ordinance Code would have enforced it's use on all other guns as well. If there was disarray in transportation and anything else it may have affected the codes in question.   However, it didn't affect Mauser changing to SVW in 1945.  If the German developed the Ordinance codes to keep the Plant ID from being detected, they sure blew it with leaving the complete stamp on the Mauser HSc. Also with the Sauer HS or the Walther PPK and most of the PP''S.  I would have thought the Germans would have included these guns into the Ordinance code scheme too.  It was almost like and after thought with some of the PP's.  I would have thought the Germans being so meticulous in most areas would not have let this thing slip though the cracks.

[vlim]

Ordnance codes were only used on guns that were officially accepted by the military and as such they were subject to the regulations that were stated in the acceptance agreement.
Since there was no acceptance agreement for the HSc, there was no need to hide anything. Also note that wartime C96 pistols, M1934 pistols and even M1914 pistols during WW1 all retained their normal commercial markings. Again because there was no official army acceptance agreement for them.
 
 

[donp326]

Thanks Vlim That answers it pretty well.  Sound like a rather convoluted system to me.

[jcorl]

OK.  I am officially confused.  That does not take much, I might add.  If there was no acceptance agreement in place on the HSc, then why would there be Heer acceptance stamps on the HSc?  (to include the military test proof or ATP, in early examples) 

Just asking.

Jim   

[Biker86]

I think I understand. The P.38 was intended primarily as a military weapon. Nearly all of the P.38 production during the war went to the military under some kind of contract agreement.

The HSc (and the PP, PPK and 38H) was designed for the commercial market. While the German military purchased significant quantities of them, what they bought was the same item that could be purchased by individuals or non-military entities (with the proper permits, of course). In the U.S. we might refer to an HSc purchased and accepted by the WaA as a "substitute standard."

Of course based on this logic, I still don't understand why some Walther PPs had the ordinance code. But maybe that is a question for the PP/PPk forum.

[jcorl]

Not so sure about that.  59,839 went to the commercial market, while 135,000 went to the army plus another 27,100 went to the Navy.  Another 30,000 went to police units.  Those numbers don't look like it was marketed as a primarily commercial weapon.  If it was designed for the commercial market, then why did the military put their acceptance stamp on it?  The commercial market, as I understand it, was the officer's rank and other higher rank officials that were allowed to purchase this military weapon. 

Just some food for thought on this issue.

Jim   

[Warbird]

You can be sure about it, Jim.  Vlim has years of contacts in Oberndorf and knows of what he speaks.  If it will help, only "front-line sidearms", i.e., P.08 and P.38 in 9mm, and not "personal pocket pistols", i.e., HSc in 7.65, were required by agreement to have the Ordnance Code shown instead of the manufacturer.

[jcorl]

That helps Warbird.  I just have a hard head.  It just needs to be driven home a little.  Thanks for the clarification.  Personal pocket pistol does make a good explanation as an exception to the front line rule.  I appreciate the help in wrapping my head around the concept.  Many thanks.     Jim