So why no STG 44 clones again?

Status
Not open for further replies.
As @12Bravo20 and @CapnMac have stated, an authentic stamped steel StG-44, in select fire or even neutered semiauto only version, would take absolutely immense tooling investment and require massive amounts of startup capital, and be a huge money pit with no hope of profit until at least tens of thousands were made and sold. It would take decades to sell that many StG-44s, even if it were marketed and sold by a major brand.
 
That was more true of the Haenel versions, which culminated in the various StG-45 variants, which were Volkswaffe, and not built for longevity. And, were hampered by all requiring Mp-43/44 magazines.

There's a modern notion that stamping is both cheap and easy. That's complicated. The dies required for stamping can be ludicrously expensive as they need to be made of hardened steel to incredible tolerances. In use, the dies can go out of tolerance quickly (and in differing rates for hot versus cold stamping), Beyond the die for the stamp cutting, you need others to achieve the bends, too. And, you'll need a very qualified machinist to test and check the assembled bits. Which usually then need to welded up in a jig. All the load bearing or specifically-hardened bits then need to welded or riveted to the parts you have.

The economy only occurs at scale, you need a run of parts in the thousands, and need dozens of skilled workers. Not the ideal for making a run of a hundred or so niche firearms.

Not even ideal at the millions, it took the Soviets a decade to be able actually make the Ak as a stamped weapon. And they had factories by the dozens, even hundreds to hand for the task.
Russians do not like to admit it but they got Germans to set up the stamping operation for the 47's. you make it like stamping costs more then forging. I always thought stamping once set up is the cheapest way to mass produce weapons
 
Russians do not like to admit it but they got Germans to set up the stamping operation for the 47's. you make it like stamping costs more then forging. I always thought stamping once set up is the cheapest way to mass produce weapons

It is cheaper in the (very) long run…. But not easier. There’s a myth that AKs were or are “made in caves,” this could not be farther from the truth. On the other hand, a cave dweller with a lathe and milling machine (old tech) can machine a chunk of metal into firearm parts without too much trouble, comparatively.


If an STG 44 clone was made I’d think it would have to be constructed differently from the original. Maybe cast parts? I have never held one of the .22 clones from Germany but I assumed this was the case with those.
 
It really doesn't matter if the parts are stamped or forged, you will have the initial higher cost of the stamping/forming tools needed to make any parts. Same goes for MIM parts too. It doesn't matter if it is a mold, forming dies, or stamping dies you still have the initial high cost to start with. With using hammer forged parts, you still have dies to deal with. And eve if using a sold piece of billet, you have the initial cost of designing and programming for the CNC machines.

It really doesn't matter which method is used to produce parts and/or a complete firearm, there is always a high cost to start with. And as stated, you would have to produce and sell a lot of the product in order to keep prices down.
 
Back when AKs were novel and ammo was cheap, the "milled receiver" rifles were highly desired.
But I read that they came about because while the design was for heavy metal pressing, the Soviets did not have the stamping industry to make them that way but they had lots of machine tools and machinists from the Mosin Nagant and Maxim gun era. So they machined them until they could set up to stamp.
 
It is cheaper in the (very) long run…. But not easier. There’s a myth that AKs were or are “made in caves,” this could not be farther from the truth. On the other hand, a cave dweller with a lathe and milling machine (old tech) can machine a chunk of metal into firearm parts without too much trouble, comparatively.


If an STG 44 clone was made I’d think it would have to be constructed differently from the original. Maybe cast parts? I have never held one of the .22 clones from Germany but I assumed this was the case with those.
all I ever read was that stamping was so much cheaper and faster then forging. the first AK's were forged then after the lured Germans to set up their stamping of the rifles they never forged AK's again. so the Russians went to stamping to make it harder and more expensive then forging?
 
all I ever read was that stamping was so much cheaper and faster then forging. the first AK's were forged then after the lured Germans to set up their stamping of the rifles they never forged AK's again. so the Russians went to stamping to make it harder and more expensive then forging?

It’s the setup that’s killer… you need a high-precision factory with lots of specialized machinery and tooling, working to very precise tolerances. It’s the reason why American factories have only had modest success in building AKs. Unless you make the investment with the plan to make millions of units, it’s not necessarily cost effective.
 
stamping was so much cheaper and faster then forging.
Point of detail, not "forging" but "milling" is what you mean.
The forge makes a billet larger than the final part, and you machine away all the parts that are not the final part you want.
This takes rather a lot of expensive alloy steel and reduces it to shavings., and it's not easy to police up the shavings and send it back to the smelters to make more steel (and there's the issue of the stuff is contaminated with cutting & lubricating oils (smelters are not keen on that in their mix).

So, if your steel is expensive, and your labor is cheap, and you can tolerate a generally high reject rate, then stampings are "less expensive."

And, the Soviets had experience with stamping as they were part of the PpSh (papasha), PVT-41, and PPS. Now, the parts used were designed with considerable "slop" to their fit for wartime expediency. Often the parts were designed to less-than critical to function, barrel shrouds and the like. Trunions and other receiver parts were simply shrouded by the bent sheet metal. At this "low level" of technology, only the magazines issued with the arm were like to work. It was the tolerances needed for an all-stamped 1mm receiver blank that vexed the Soviets for a decade.
 
It’s the setup that’s killer… you need a high-precision factory with lots of specialized machinery and tooling, working to very precise tolerances. It’s the reason why American factories have only had modest success in building AKs. Unless you make the investment with the plan to make millions of units, it’s not necessarily cost effective.

While I'm sure its expensive, I think the cost of doing stamping is being exaggerated a bit. I hang out a lot over at the Weapons Guild forums where a lot of people do either completely scratch built guns or build from parts kits. Stamped parts are available from various members there for reasonable prices depending on whats coming in kit-wise. For example, below is a Beretta AR70/90 stamped receiver that I picked up from a member there. Only a few hundred of the parts kits were imported and quite a few less of the buyers were buying a receiver stamping (I think I was on the list slightly over #100). The maker was still making and selling them for around $500. Total # of units sold was definitely less than 500, probably less than 300.

ar7090.jpg
 
Stamping out parts in a punch press by the 1,000s per hour is cheap. It is the initial setup that is expensive. And then there is the technical knowledge needed to make the tooling too. As a machinist/tool and die maker, I had to go through 2 years of school ad 4 years of apprenticeship.

The initial startup costs are going to be expensive no matter if the parts are stamped or milled. Add in a limited/small run just adds to the cost. As far as it goes for CNC machine operators, just about anyone can be taught to place the material into the machine correctly and push the start button. Making the tooling need to produce parts or even machining the parts takes more skills.

I've worked in small tool and die shops along with working for big manufacturers. IF you only make a small amount of parts, they will be more expensive per part than if very large quantities are produced. The reason is that the manufacturer has to recover the initial design/set up costs. So the more products sold, lower the price is for each individual product.
 
BTW. I'd love to own a STG44 clone. But I ain't paying more than about $1k for it, and it better be really, really good. And I'm not going to buy one until they've been out at least 3-5 years to get the bugs worked out.


That’s just it. The STG wasn’t “really, really good” to begin with. It was a jam prone piece with a rather short killing range & terrible accuracy. WAY ahead of it’s time.. yes, absolutely, and their historical value is uncontested. However, compared to an AK47 & more so, an AR15, the STG is woefully outmatched. Remember, the true STG44 used the 8mm short (Kurz), which is not a viable option today. The first thing is the operating system would need be outfitted to use either 223 or 7.62. This is not typically an easy venture, and I believe a hang-up in a modern production STG.

They are nice pieces of yester-year with intrinsic historical value. But a modern “battle rifle” or one to be thought of as a defensive weapon in any way is simply not reality. Not when I can build an AR15 in 223/ 7.62 (or half a dozen “fan boy” cartridges), that is 100% reliable, tough as nails, will group inside 1MOA & tag a gong at 800yds with ease…, and all for around $1K or so. I mean, c’mon..
 
They're cool but in an age of $500 AR's, nobody wants to pay for an outdated, 11lb range toy.
lets be fair....not ENOUGH people wanna pay for an 11lb range toy :p....I mean they DO sell Thompsons here and there.....
 
We shot a select-fire STG 44 in Newburgh IN, just outside of Evansville.

A young guy brought the gun to the private gun club,—— about seven years ago.——

Almost no recoil, with a pretty slow rate of fire.
 
lets be fair....not ENOUGH people wanna pay for an 11lb range toy :p....I mean they DO sell Thompsons here and there.....
The problem usually seems to be that more people 'say' they want something than actually buy it. I thought an MP40 replica would be awesome but now that they're available, I'm not going to actually buy one. ;)

The Thompson is an American icon, fueled as much by gangster movies as WWII use. How many people actually own one? I'd wager your average shooter doesn't even know what an STG44 is. The Thompson can also be made "as-is", in its original chambering. They've also been made with an aluminum receiver to cut weight. The STG44 really needs to be adapted to something else.

Like I said, they're cool and everything but I can understand why they don't make one.
 
They're cool but in an age of $500 AR's, nobody wants to pay for an outdated, 11lb range toy.
I'm your huckleberry. And if $ is all anyone were concerned about and the AR goes BANG at $500, then how does the market bear that some AR brands sells quite well for $1000-2500. Or that some people but AKs instead of ARs?
Yes, you are sly, you saw that I stuck in the concept of "branding" in there. Some people pay over $5 for a bottle of fancy water. Some people pay $1.50, some won't pay for any bottled water and are fine with tap water.
I think the concept of "range toys" follows the same economic principle. Price elasticity varies greatly along spectrum of factors.
 
The problem usually seems to be that more people 'say' they want something than actually buy it. I thought an MP40 replica would be awesome but now that they're available, I'm not going to actually buy one. ;)

The Thompson is an American icon, fueled as much by gangster movies as WWII use. How many people actually own one? I'd wager your average shooter doesn't even know what an STG44 is. The Thompson can also be made "as-is", in its original chambering. They've also been made with an aluminum receiver to cut weight. The STG44 really needs to be adapted to something else.

Like I said, they're cool and everything but I can understand why they don't make one.

You also can’t count on pleasing everyone. Of the STG44 admirers out there, half won’t actually buy, most of the rest won’t be interested in any repro, only a genuine surplus parts kit with a US made receiver. Others will want a full repro but will want it in a modern caliber they can shoot. So the real market is tiny. I’d love to have one and think they’re cool but it’s a toy… I’m not at all sure I want to spend $500 on it, let alone $1000 or more that it would likely cost realistically. And if it’s a repro I want it in some more readily accessible caliber like 7.62x39.
 
Quote me wrong but few years ago still were made in Germany in original caliber.
The STG 3- to 44 variant and Winchester Lever actions are the only my eyes pursue. Sadly, none of friends have one.
Just in case there is a THR member with one, I would pay the ammo also I can cook a BBQ or wash car (or 2) in exchange (btw passport ready). Btw I saw one in FL in Air Force Museum, also in Paris (Les Invalides) few years back and my wife had to pushed to walk.
If any makers would do one 97% similar to the original the whole market will scream bitters about it.
 
Last edited:
Quote me wrong but few years ago still were made in Germany in original caliber.
The STG 3- to 44 variant and Winchester Lever actions are the only my eyes pursue. Sadly, none of friends have one.
Just in case there is a THR member with one, I would pay the ammo also I can cook a BBQ or wash car (or 2) in exchange (btw passport ready). Btw I saw one in FL in Air Force Museum, also in Paris (Les Invalides) few years back and my wife had to pushed to walk.
If any makers would do one 97% similar to the original the whole market will scream bitters about it.
Hill & Mac attempted to bring a clone to market in a few different calibers, they ended up with 671 pre-orders,
but here we are several years later and no STG-44's.
They ended up suing the machine shop, but I have not seen any results from the lawsuit.

You can always go to Vegas and shoot the real deal..... https://www.battlefieldvegas.com/weapon/assault-rifles/stg-44-assault-rifle/
 
Point of detail, not "forging" but "milling" is what you mean.
The forge makes a billet larger than the final part, and you machine away all the parts that are not the final part you want.
This takes rather a lot of expensive alloy steel and reduces it to shavings., and it's not easy to police up the shavings and send it back to the smelters to make more steel (and there's the issue of the stuff is contaminated with cutting & lubricating oils (smelters are not keen on that in their mix).

So, if your steel is expensive, and your labor is cheap, and you can tolerate a generally high reject rate, then stampings are "less expensive."

And, the Soviets had experience with stamping as they were part of the PpSh (papasha), PVT-41, and PPS. Now, the parts used were designed with considerable "slop" to their fit for wartime expediency. Often the parts were designed to less-than critical to function, barrel shrouds and the like. Trunions and other receiver parts were simply shrouded by the bent sheet metal. At this "low level" of technology, only the magazines issued with the arm were like to work. It was the tolerances needed for an all-stamped 1mm receiver blank that vexed the Soviets for a decade.
now I understand the system better now
 
It’s the setup that’s killer… you need a high-precision factory with lots of specialized machinery and tooling, working to very precise tolerances. It’s the reason why American factories have only had modest success in building AKs. Unless you make the investment with the plan to make millions of units, it’s not necessarily cost effective.
but would not CAD systems make short work of getting the tolerances right?
 
There’s no market or else we’d have seen them on shelves by now. Convincing someone to spend $500 on a 22LR clone is a lot easier than convincing them to spend more on a full scale STG 44. The guy who just thinks they are cool old guns can satisfy his itch with a 22LR clone without dumping a bunch of cash into it. Nobody else is actually going to buy STG 44 of any flavor.
 
but would not CAD systems make short work of getting the tolerances right?

It definitely can as long as you have a good engineer and a good CNC programmer. And you still have to do test runs with the CNC program to make sure everything is correct. Just because everything was designed on a computer and then machined on a computer numerical controlled machine does not mean the first run will be 100% correct.
 
It definitely can as long as you have a good engineer and a good CNC programmer. And you still have to do test runs with the CNC program to make sure everything is correct. Just because everything was designed on a computer and then machined on a computer numerical controlled machine does not mean the first run will be 100% correct.
that happens with everything like making furniture where you mess the first few find your rythym and start pumping them out. I remember when they first started making the FN FAL. there was a pile of messed up receivers then they got the hang of it. same with the M1 Garand I think with the bending of the operating rods and some issues with the receivers
 
There’s no market or else we’d have seen them on shelves by now. Convincing someone to spend $500 on a 22LR clone is a lot easier than convincing them to spend more on a full scale STG 44. The guy who just thinks they are cool old guns can satisfy his itch with a 22LR clone without dumping a bunch of cash into it. Nobody else is actually going to buy STG 44 of any flavor.
if Norinco wasnt banned they would make them to sell for $400 firing the 39 round
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top