|
Post by newcomer on Feb 1, 2013 15:20:23 GMT -5
hello everyone,
Since textbooks were cheap this quarter, I had enough to grab one of the amazing echo 1 BARs. The faux wood annoys the crap out of me, so I was wondering if a wood foregrip and a bakelite stock would fit.
I HAVE read rumors that they may/may not be compatable, but nothing definitive. If anyone could shed some light before I sink 40+ dollars, I'd appreciate it.
|
|
2nd Bat
Master sergeant
Posts: 11,813
|
Post by 2nd Bat on Feb 1, 2013 17:28:08 GMT -5
The front handguard fits with little modification and adds a lot. The bakelight rear stock should work also as it is hollow although it will require a lot more tweaking and modification. If it were me and I were going for that look I would simply paint the butt stock in a slightly textured, flat black finish. I personsonally dont find the faux wood butt stock all that objectionable although like you I find the handguard dreadful.
|
|
|
Post by newcomer on Feb 1, 2013 18:33:03 GMT -5
That answers my questions exactly. Ill buy the grip and paint the stock then. thanks
|
|
2nd Bat
Master sergeant
Posts: 11,813
|
Post by 2nd Bat on Feb 2, 2013 0:09:06 GMT -5
There is some conflicting information as to whether the bakelight stocks ever actually wound up on ww2 BARs. The parts absolutely existed. I had a bakelight rear stock (new in the box and never issued). The parts tag indicated it was made in February of 1943. I've also seen lots of pictures from Normany on that showed BARs whos butt stocks definitely looked like the black bakelight stocks. Lots of these pictures with the push to liberate Cherbourg.
Lots of sites argue they never got issued and werent in combat until Korea. I agree they were uncommon but if I had to swear to an absolute Id say some guns got them as an upgrade or armorers repair.
|
|
|
Post by newcomer on Feb 2, 2013 2:29:45 GMT -5
Well I assume most fellas won't repaint their faux wood stock to the bakelite "color", so I believe that solves the issue of rarity. I also tend to represent late war more often, so that should help as well.
|
|
2nd Bat
Master sergeant
Posts: 11,813
|
Post by 2nd Bat on Feb 2, 2013 13:23:26 GMT -5
Absolutely.
|
|
roadwarrior
Private
Barbarbarbarbarbarbarbarbarbarbarbarbarbarbar
Posts: 262
|
Post by roadwarrior on Feb 3, 2013 13:55:40 GMT -5
Well the early plastic stocks supposedly cracked easily and with the abundance of wood stocks they didn't make the push. I'm no expert, that's just what I've read around the internet.
|
|
2nd Bat
Master sergeant
Posts: 11,813
|
Post by 2nd Bat on Feb 3, 2013 15:47:55 GMT -5
I strongly doubt that they cracked easily. The bakelight butt stock for the BAR is extremely robust. In our arms room in Vietnam 69-70 we had a broad selection of exotic weapons for use in cross training and familiarization. There were a lot of eastern block weapons but also a lot of WW2 weapons. We had a couple stens, grease guns, thompsons, carbines and a BAR. It had a bakelight butt stock. It was a lollipops of a weapon.
|
|
|
Post by BigBoy on Feb 5, 2013 4:56:13 GMT -5
From the book, "Rock in a Hard Place, The Browning Automatic Rifle" by James Ballou which is the definitive work on the BAR rifle, there is a section on the selection of the plastic (Bakelite and Resinox) butt stock over the wooden butt stock. In initial testing the wooden butt stock cracked if the BAR was dropped from a height of 3 feet butt first on to concrete. If the same test was done with the plastic butt stock, the height was increased to 5 feet before the butt stock cracked. As a result of these tests and increased production rates with the plastic stocks, the change to the plastic stock was approved on 21 March 1942. This date preceded by ten months the initial productions of the M1918A2 BAR. Since the change in production to the plastic stock occurred long before D-Day, one would expect to see BARs with the plastic stocks being used by the invasion forces and other US forces in the war.
|
|