1919 A4 Forums banner

FG42 - heaven is near

8K views 23 replies 13 participants last post by  PTRS 14.5 
#1 ·
Look what I have been fingering for the last few days. It will be coming up to auction in a few months.









 
See less See more
9
#2 ·
That one is a beauty for sure, most of us can only dream of owning an original. Myself included.
At least I have some new pictures for my computer wallpaper now, thanks for posting them.
Please post a link when it comes up for auction.
CaptMax
 
#3 ·
Considering that is probably one of the rarest most expensive MG's to come up for auction worth hundreds of thousands you would think they could scrounge up a $50 German WWII 8mm ammo can to photograph it propped up on rather than a cheap modern US ammo can. Makes the pics seem kinda hokey IMO with that in them. Sorta like an original M1895 Colt MG propped up on a $10 box of Tula ammo to me. Love the gun, but I would fire the photographer.
 
#5 ·
Former MIke Free gun sold by the state of PA at auction to compensate victims of Free's business violations. Seems more and more FGs are making it to market by private sale or auction. Couple 1st model FGs have been offered recently, one somewhat publicly and one privately. Nice to see them change hands.
 
#9 ·
Free bought most, or at least a lot of the collection of Lou Pascilla, if I recall his last name correctly, a friend of his who had some unusual SMGs such as one of the double magwell MP40s and other stuff such as a couple of 2nd model FG42s and other German MGs that were his favorite. Prior to his passing, I had worked on several of Lou's guns and spent time with him a the creek when he wasn't shooting. At one point I had talked to him about buying one of his FG42s, but it didn't happen. I did buy an FG42 some years later and have it still. When Lou passed Free muscled into the collection and none of them reached the market that I recall. No doubt others had some hope of acquiring some of his guns, but I don't know if Free got all of them or not. Free's money for Lou's guns might have come from the customers that he fleeced, in my opinion, but who knows. I didn't get along with Free at all, but enjoyed Lou a lot and was sorry to see him go. He really enjoyed his MGs!
 
#11 ·
This always hurts the value as opposed to a "serviceable" firearm. I wonder if this is the firearm that the news reported that the dealer paid $13k for? If so I would say that was a smoking deal.
Someday I hope to be able to add one of the semis manufactured by SMG to my collection, I doubt I will ever have the funds to purchase one on a form 4.
CaptMax
 
#12 ·
>Someday I hope to be able to add one of the semis manufactured by SMG to my collection, I doubt I will ever have the funds to purchase one on a form 4.<

Get your FFL07/SOTII, buy the semi FG42 and convert it to FA as a post sample. I am amazed at how many guys just don't want to do this when they complain about not being able to own x,y and z transferable MGs. With the way posties are appreciating given that they can be sold to a licensed mfg or importer without a letter, it is a golden opportunity with a modest investment.
A registered DEWAT FG won't suffer much devaluation due to the deactivation as it is still an original C+R gun. I've handled two DEWAT 'G' type FGs and the damage is quite light and repair easy to do. FWIW
 
#14 ·
Bob, I know you can educate me but I thought to be a C&R gun it couldn't be a rewatt? Besides being on the C&R list what constitutes one? On machine gun prices website there is a big difference between a C&R and one that isn't. Case and point, a Bren gun for instance.
CaptMax
 
#16 ·
1gewehr notes above the general requirements for C+R status, but not all 50 year old MGs are eligible for that status or are listed on the C+R list. Some require proof of date of manufacture, although ATF has softened their stance on this in recent years. Examples are AK47s and M2 .50 BMGs, due to so many having been made post-'68 Amnesty and the sorry state of vetting transfers of such guns by ATF over the years. Now that ATF has a more sophisticated vetting protocol, with reference to original registration required for every transfer, the element of proof has been less onerous and will probably disappear if it hasn't already. There are quite a few MGs in the NFRTR that are fifty years and older from date of manufacture that have never been offered for listing.
A registered DEWAT by definition is an MG registered prior to or before the end of the '68 Amnesty. Any registered DEWAT can be legally reactivated, since it is already registered, by an individual by taxed form 1 or by an FFL07/SOTII on form 2. Many DEWATs were not registered before the end of the Amnesty and they are not eligible for legal reactivation and they show up all the time. However, and this is a serious issue for C+R collectors, many unregistered MGs in the US after the Amensty that by law were required to be 'destroyed' first, meaning receivers cut in half or the controlled part reproduced and substituted, for legal registration as remanufactured MGs, were illegally registered as "DEWATs" years after the end of the Amnesty. This was easy to do by individuals and FFL07/SOTIIs. For instance an FFL07SOTII could take an unregistered MG, not cut it in half and weld it back together or make a new replacement for the controlled part, and file a form 2 merely checking the "reactivated" box and send it in. The form 2 would have the name of the original manufacturer and serial number and ATF would be none the wiser since they did not inspect the hardware. No required ID and address of the CII who did the reactivation on the receiver either.These guns were sold to unsuspecting buyers as C+R to make a few extra bucks due to the increased value. Once the form 2 with the bogus registration is processed, the gun is transferred as an "original" with the registration application information reflecting that the MG is original. The tip off is that the date of original registration by form 2 is after the end of the Amnesty so the gun is an illegal registration and illegal C+R. The only way to find this out is filing an FOIA request with ATF for the serial numbers of MGs for which the registrant requires checking. The redacted copies of the original registration, with ate and form number, will tell the owner everything he needs to know about C+R status or not. Unfortunately there are quite a few of these MGs in the NFRTR, enough so that there is actually a collector's market for fake C+R MGs!!
An FOIA on this FG, proving eligibility as C+R by date of original registration, would be appropriate and, in my opinion, required by any prospective purchaser given the value. Only the current registrant can file the FOIA so it is unlikely that the current registrant has done this or can do it prior to the auction. Perhaps he already has proof. All for now.
 
#20 ·
>As far as it being C&R eligible, is there any requirement do know for certain? What I mean is that if there is no other way to know, then could one get in trouble by assuming it is as all the evidence in front of them points to a C&R gun. I have seen plenty of Form 4s that have no indication that the guns were ever dewatted and list the manufacturer as the original manufacturer. There is no way to tell that its anything other than it appears, which is a C&R gun. Then you see the gun and find damage from the dewat. I guess my point is, would ignorance not be bliss in most cases? Has the ATF ever called anyone on this? Like you said in a few more years it will not even matter. You know ever detail of the NFA but the ATF... well on my last form 4, they did not believe the standard barrel length of a MG08... Like you can cut down the barrel of a gun with a waterjacket!!! I don't know I see the ATF figuring any of it out. Any what if you had a non-NFA gun. I feel like some of these guns could have been reactivated from Demilled guns and without knowing, one could transfer as C&R…<

Not sure what you are getting at here. The issue is that a buyer of a C+R MG pays a significant premium for an original factory MG and the C+R transfer status. If the gun turns out to have been registered after the end of the '68 Amnesty and is not legally a C+R, the buyer is out a lot of money for an overpriced reman. Registrations have been notoriously inaccurate over many many years for many different reasons and especially for C+R MGs so add in the fake C+R MGs and the NFRTR is further compromised. Now ATF vets every transfer application against the original registration. and, yes, ATF is constantly having to deal with MGs that were illegally and incorrectly registered, but in their effort to "clean up" the registry they are very forgiving. They are in a tough spot since an owner that has a compromised MG can make an issue out of it if he is hassled by ATF, further proving that the NFRTR is too badly polluted and can't be used in any registration prosecutions by the US attorneys.
No registrations except early F1s and 5s had a line describing the nature of the deactivation. If the original form 5 had that info it should have continued on in subsequent F5 transfers, but many registered DEWATs were just transferred by F4s so the paper trails was interrupted. Further, once the gun is reactivated, the information does not carry onto the next transfer. The only way to prove that an MG was registered prior to or during the '68 Amnesty is with an FOIA request with a copy of the original registration showing date and form of registration.
When all MGs are "C+R" that doesn't change the value and premium for original factory MGs. As the years go by all it does is progressively dilute the C+R designation as more and more remanufactured MGs became "eligible" for that transfer status. In my opinion ATF will add a provision for eligibility for C+R that requires them to be original factory MGs thus retaining the value of the C+R designation. Otherwise it has no meaning any more if remans are C+R eligible. In any case original MGs will always have a higher value than a reman example of the same gun. FWIW
 
#21 ·
Not sure what you are getting at here. The issue is that a buyer of a C+R MG pays a significant premium for an original factory MG and the C+R transfer status. If the gun turns out to have been registered after the end of the '68 Amnesty and is not legally a C+R, the buyer is out a lot of money for an overpriced reman. Registrations have been notoriously inaccurate over many many years for many different reasons and especially for C+R MGs so add in the fake C+R MGs and the NFRTR is further compromised. Now ATF vets every transfer application against the original registration. and, yes, ATF is constantly having to deal with MGs that were illegally and incorrectly registered, but in their effort to "clean up" the registry they are very forgiving. They are in a tough spot since an owner that has a compromised MG can make an issue out of it if he is hassled by ATF, further proving that the NFRTR is too badly polluted and can't be used in any registration prosecutions by the US attorneys.
No registrations except early F1s and 5s had a line describing the nature of the deactivation. If the original form 5 had that info it should have continued on in subsequent F5 transfers, but many registered DEWATs were just transferred by F4s so the paper trails was interrupted. Further, once the gun is reactivated, the information does not carry onto the next transfer. The only way to prove that an MG was registered prior to or during the '68 Amnesty is with an FOIA request with a copy of the original registration showing date and form of registration.
When all MGs are "C+R" that doesn't change the value and premium for original factory MGs. As the years go by all it does is progressively dilute the C+R designation as more and more remanufactured MGs became "eligible" for that transfer status. In my opinion ATF will add a provision for eligibility for C+R that requires them to be original factory MGs thus retaining the value of the C+R designation. Otherwise it has no meaning any more if remans are C+R eligible. In any case original MGs will always have a higher value than a reman example of the same gun. FWIW
Guess here is what I was saying:

Case 1. Original MG08/15 brought home in WWI and registered in 1934. Clearly original gun. Currently on form 4.
Case 2. Original MG08/15 brought home in WWI, unregistered until 1970s. Dealer "manufactured it" which really means he just registered it without demilling/rewelding the receiver, which was technically illegal... however one can't tell from current form 4.

The only way to tell the difference is a FOIA request. Otherwise its fair to assume both guns are C&R guns. What I was asking it if ignorance is bliss... if you don't know why not just assume its a C&R gun? I did not know the ATF was checking this when the form 4 C&R was submitted. However it does make sense now why the ATF once told me one of my Maxims was registered in 1941 and then went through an impossible series of Form 3, 4, and 5 with no form 1 or 2s in between. I don't think they were suppose to tell me the later part of that. Anyway, its almost impossible for someone to know this info without a FOIA request. So are you suggesting that all MG owners start getting FOIA requests in for their MGs? I mean I received 2 of my Maxims on C&R transfers, so they should be good assuming the ATF Checked them during the transfer. The M11 I know is a 1986 gun, so that will be the last MG to become C&R. I am not sure on my M16 but that does not matter value wise and I would certainly need to find out for a C&R transfer. Well lets hope the Jap Type 96 I have coming goes through... It will cost a year of time if the Form 4 C&R does not work and I am forced into a Form 3 and Form 4... plus a more money.
 
#23 ·
>This particular FG may have a ser. number listed as JMCO4254 so I'd assume it's "remanufactured" until otherwise proven to be c+r.<

Reactivations require marking by the "maker" so it could just as well be that. Again FOIA is the only way to tell without exclusive access to NFRTR. Larry smith, who reactivated many MGs used to put LS in front of the serial when he filed the FIIs for some reason and that identifies his work. Using the original serial number can go either way. Others have done the same thing.
Actually ATF has been asked a number of times to accept only the the "value" criteria for eligibility for very some rare remans but said no. An MG only needs to meet one of the criteria but ATF is adamant that just having value without "unique" along will not fly for C+R. That's why various MGs have been listed: WH Thompson, tool room S&Ws, Tippmans, ete, etc. Maybe it's time to press the issue again…..
 
#24 ·
The 4 FG 42's I bought at Free's auction



Yes the gun is remanufactured as Bob knows and it has never been represented as anything else. I'm at a lost to even see the line of discussion for it being C&R...? All four of the FG42's (1 Model 1, 3 Model 2) I purchased in the auction have been fired and run well. In fact they are all matching with the exception of this one that has a mis matched charging handle... I'm wondering JOHNSON LMG, whats so funny about my collection? Have you ever seen it? Should you have any other questions about these 4-FG42's or the other 6 MG's I got in the auction, I'm here.

Charlie Logan
PTRS 14.5
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top