Republic Posted May 16, 2018 Report Share Posted May 16, 2018 Greetings, all! I just finished reading Frank Iannamico's The Reising Submachine Gun Story, and I'm interested in learning more about the differences between the 1st ("commercial") and 2nd ("military") variations of the M50. He mentions numerous revisions made at the behest of the USMC, but after examining several photos of M50s across a wide array of serial numbers, it has come to my attention that another somewhat prominent difference may exist between the early and late guns; the soldering method used to attach the receiver studs seems to have been either automated, or at least greatly refined, throughout production. In particular, early guns seem to have welding/soldering on the fire control group studs that extends up the side of the receiver, either to, or sometimes slightly beyond, the groove cut for the action bar. Later guns, on the other hand, appear to have only a smooth ring of solder in the immediate vicinity of the base. Initially, I thought that this was an isolated incident of a receiver that had been welded in order to repair a loose receiver stud, but it seems as though there is a high degree of consistency between the serial number of the gun, and the appearance of the attachment points. I suppose my question, then, is as follows: is anyone aware of any such changes in manufacturing practices as far as the receiver of the M50 is concerned that were made during production? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dalbert Posted May 16, 2018 Report Share Posted May 16, 2018 Republic, Welcome to the board! Thanks for helping my brother and I troubleshoot the recaptcha issue you experienced during registration. It's all good now. The only input I have to this is an account involving production of the Model 65 .22 Rifle, which is very similar to the Model 50 in design. It was produced from approximately late 1943 to May 1945, and I was recently presented with photos of a one-off Model 65 with hand stamped markings that was apparently given to someone who helped improve the welding process during Model 65 production. While this doesn't correlate exactly to what you mention, it does support the notion that the welding process deserved improvement. David Albertdalbert@sturmgewehr.com Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now