![]() I have an open mind, which should be pretty apparent since i have questioned where it was done, but, again, YOU seem to want to focus on the idea that YOUR opinion is right, and I am wrong because i am "not on the same page" as YOU. "No, it was a rifle from BSW (RR tells you this much), but been re-barreled obviously, so went through a depot or rework of some kind before the soviets did their magic on it." The above in bold contradicts what you wrote on gunboards: and i can do that since it seems my responses are nothing but counter productive since i don't agree with you since i don't have facts to back up my opinions just as you don't for yours. seems counterproductive to make assumptions, then have someone disagree with you and you seemingly post a reply that infers that they should go play somewhere else. Look, i'm not trying to be an ass here, just trying to learn. #SHANK 1 SERIAL NUMBER SERIAL#Larger question is the serial from the top looks odd, not typical of BSW, possibly re-numbered, which is no biggie as it is an rc and no part would be original to the receiver anyway." "No, it was a rifle from BSW (RR tells you this much), but been re-barreled obviously, so went through a depot or rework of some kind before the soviets did their magic on it. You have replied to the thread on gunboards about this rifle ![]() is this a "newb" thing? sure seems that way to me since i'll admit that i don't know who did it, but would love to find out, and obviously, your aren't satisfied with my not accepting your opinion as fact. ![]() Now i think i understand your implication by the statement: "you are not quite on the same page.", which i am interpreting now as since i don't agree with your opinions, i am wrong. In any case, I hear Gunboards has a very knowledgeable moderator now, one that has sorted through several thousand rc’s, and he might have the answers as to why the communists-soviet reworkers might have done this to your fine rifle. "Too far apart"? are you talking distance? are you saying that the visible numbers are a 3rd strike? i've looked at the numbers under a microscope, and would be happy to provide measurements as well as pics as i don't agree with that based on what i see in person. #SHANK 1 SERIAL NUMBER SERIAL NUMBERS#However, in this case, I am not even sure the serial numbers under the overstrike are original (actually I am pretty sure they aren't), as they look far too apart and not quite right to me. who are you referring to, the germans or the russians? do you mean that i'm not on the same page as YOU? You wrote "They.". ![]() I'm not sure what you are inferring by "you are not quite on the same page.". They probably numbered (and fireproofed) the barrel to the receiver at that time (using the original receivers serial). the barrel was a German ordnance spare, probably replaced at a depot during the war. Well, I see you are not quite on the same page. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |