Type I or Type II for an STG-58?

[Manedwolf]

Well, I've got a nice STG-58 kit, and now need to ask DSA to be on the waiting list for a receiver.

I know the I and II look a bit different with the lightening cuts. The rifle will likely be parkerized or satin black.

Is there any advantage to one over the other at all, in terms of collector value, functionality, aesthetics, anything? :)

[J. Armstrong]

I think generally type 2s are held to be aesthetically the most pleasing, although that is of course a subjective call. They are also technically a bit stronger than the type 1s, having been introduced to address a problem with type 1s cracking under extreme full auto use. For the rest of us, there is no functional difference. The vast majority of STGs were type 1 - IIRC, a few type 2s surfaced, probably as replacement receivers rather than original manufacture.

Collector value and kit gun are sort of mutually exclusive terms, unfortunately.

[MAINER]

Matter of personal taste mostly The type I is perhaps the "most" correct for eariler serial no's. The type II's were built for use on heavy barelled FALO machine guns. Some thought the type I was a bit weak in certain area's for such use.

I don't think one is more valued or better than the other. I'm happy with either but for me the type II's are sexier! :love:

[icwells]

I'm pretty sure DSA makes more Type IIs, so the wait is shorter. It took six months for two Type Is for my brother and I, but it seems like it usually takes about six weeks for a Type II. So, get a Type II if you don't want to wait as long, especially if either is considered historically correct..

[Manedwolf]

Cool! Thanks for the various input and opinions. :)

If both are "correct", I might go with the II, then, due to the shorter wait.

Also because if it is indeed stronger, I want it to last forever. Depending on how politics go, I might not ever be allowed to buy another, so...

[101ABN327]

Look at your recoil plate to determine the correct receiver for you kit.

[J. Armstrong]

Originally posted by 101ABN327
Look at your recoil plate to determine the correct receiver for you kit.

Good point, although I believe that type 2 receivered STGs are rebuilds, and that all STG lowers are type 1. Can anybody confirm or correct that ?

[2336]

You might want to call DSA and ask to speak to Jeff. I talked to him awhile back trying to order a Type II receiver and he suggested that I go with a Type I. He said that they get Type I's in quicker. Either way, call and talk to Jeff. He'll steer you right if there's not an issue whether it's a Type I or II and you're looking for quicker turn-around.

[sturmgrenadiere]

For purposes of a semi-auto rifle, there is no benefit. And arguable for a full auto. The stress cracking experienced in full auto work were on the edge of very extreme use and testing if I remember what the Steven's book noted.

Consider that L2/C2 pattern rilfes are void of this mod. Only metrics. For us common folks with semi's, it is exclusively a cosmetic and availablilty issue.

YMMV

[pistol5]

Sir, I have a matching #'s stg kit w/T2 lower( mated w/ DSA T2 upper) I got from member chefbeef several years ago. He said they were pretty rare as only a couple thousand were made prior to discontinuance of production. HTH's. Wendell

[gunplumber]

a type III is also "correct" though less common for an StG 58

[101ABN327]

Originally posted by sturmgrenadiere
For purposes of a semi-auto rifle, there is no benefit. And arguable for a full auto. The stress cracking experienced in full auto work were on the edge of very extreme use and testing if I remember what the Steven's book noted.

Consider that L2/C2 pattern rilfes are void of this mod. Only metrics. For us common folks with semi's, it is exclusively a cosmetic and availablilty issue.

YMMV

This is correct! I liken it to installing Olds wheels on a Corvette restoration. They still work, but just not quite right, but that's just me...

Cheers!
101

[Brian in MN]

Originally posted by MAINER
. The type II's were built for use on heavy barelled FALO machine guns.

That is simply not true. The type of barrel attached to the receiver had nothing to do with FNs decision to modify the receiver. Unlike inch production, nearly all metric FN production was select fire.