Any Real Differences in Beretta 38s?

[car007]

I am looking to buy a Beretta 38 with my C&R. Besides the cosmetics is there any reason to look for a 38/42 vs a 38/43? I plan to shoot it so it will not be a safe queen. My research seems to indicate the 38/44 is not as desirable due to the internal changes. Which overall will hold value better over time as well? Thank you for any feedback.

[StrangeRanger]

Excellent choice. i wish you luck. It seems Beretta prices have gotten stupider faster than just about every other WWII SMG. Only the Best currently has a couple on offer.

 

The only real difference between a 38/42 and a 38/43 is the absence of fluting on the barrel of the latter.

The 38/44 got a much simpler recoil spring arrangement which was carried on in the post-war models 38/49, 4 and 5. It's certainly nothing to eliminate it from consideration

Edited August 17, 2022 by StrangeRanger

[Got Uzi]

Personally I prefer the simplicity of the 38/a44. My dad has one and its his favorite shooter. I'd be curious as to where your finding your "research" from as most guys want simple, and you would too given you plan to shoot this gun. Hard to find/expensive parts isn't a good idea when looking at an 80 year old SMG to take out and blast with....but what do I know?

[car007]

Thank you for the information on the 38/44, my comment was based on an assumption that the simpler arrangement was a war time expediency. Similar to how I have read that the M3A1's rear receiver is not as robust as the m3s. My mistaken conclusion. I have not seen many 38/44s come up for sale it seems most are 38/42s and 38/43s. I am open to all of them now!

[Got Uzi]

Your informatinon is still skewed looking at the M3 vs M3A1.....the backs of the receivers were the same on USGI guns (Guide Lamp or Ithaca) it was the guide rod back plates used on the M3 vs M3A1 that caused the issues....even then they weren't fully the root cause of damage, but rather the lack of maintaning the weapon by replacing recoild/bolt driving springs....The M3 has a large plate that contacted most of the back of the receiver, where as the M3A1 only had a 1/2" wide bar that located in a limited area of the back end. Add worn out springs, with a smaller contact surface area, and you end up with blown out receivers. You also have to keep in mind that all of these weapons were only expected to last 3 months to a couple years and that was it, they weren't planning on them to survive and still be used 80+ years later.

 

Not to come off as a dick, but reading things like that online, posted by so called "gun blog experts" or "internet gun writers" tends to lead people down the wrong path due to bad information. Even Ian over at Forgotten Weapons has gotten some details wrong over the years in regards to vintage SMG's.....the M3/M3A1 included.

Edited August 17, 2022 by Got Uzi

[car007]

Thank you for clearing it up, I have an M3 but was looking for an M3A1 originally, harder to find so I think I focused on the comments about the m3 being stronger on the rear receiver to push me to go ahead and buy what I could find. I do not want to contribute to misinformation so I appreciate the feedback.

[Got Uzi]

I had an M3 and a couple M3A1s over the years and there is a pile of misinformation in regards to the receivers and them blowing out on the back. Its comical to the point of wanting to not say anything anymore as the internet knows all lol

[Frank Iannamico]

The M3A1 had a different backplate (smaller) so the bolt assembly could be removed without taking off the ejector housing.

If you have an M3A1 get and install an M3 backplate... as stated by UZI-John

 

Not to turn this into a Grease Gun discussion...

 

The 38/42 (series) is smaller, lighter and handier than a Beretta 38A

[StrangeRanger]

And don't pass up a well made tube gun from a name manufacturer like Wilson, Erb or DLO.

It won't have the collector value of a C&R gun but you'll pay a lot less for it and if you're looking for a shooter collector value shouldn't be your primary concern. A tube gun is also likely to have a lower round count and to be in better condition overall.

[APEXgunparts]

Just today I was shooting a friends M1938 Beretta tube gun, built on a STEN tube?
Ran well and was a fun gun to shoot.
I have a Beretta 1938/42 (on paper) that I believe is a 1938/43 going by the barrel.
Of course the barrel may have been exchanged to the later type when it was activated for the previous owner by OOW.
Anyways, my gun is a pleasure to shoot, and magazines and parts are available for a reasonable price.
Any model of this SMG you can find / afford is going to serve you well.

Richard

 

[hkg3k]

The only real difference between a 38/42 and a 38/43 is the absence of fluting on the barrel of the latter.

 

I had a 38/43 and this is the only difference I could only ever discern. The 38/4x guns are tiny little things IMO, but are extremely smooth shooters.

[Robert Henley]

I have a C&R 38/42 (it has the fluted barrel) which was a WWII bring back and registered at that time. It's a great SMG. I was initially attracted to it because I'm left-handed (as well as Beretta quality), and of course it was left-hand ejection.