Sten MK II purchase/suggestions

[USMC1990]

Would you purchase a WW II Sten MK II or a Tube gun, if you had a choice today

 

[skoda]

If you are more of a collector or a "Hey guys, look what I just picked up" kind of person then an original would be the best choice.

If you want to go to the range or back 40 and blast away then a tube gun is the best choice.

 

[USMC1990]

If you are more of a collector or a "Hey guys, look what I just picked up" kind of person then an original would be the best choice.

If you want to go to the range or back 40 and blast away then a tube gun is the best choice.

Couldnt they both serve the same purpose? Would you NOT take the relic out and blast away?

 

[skoda]

Couldnt they both serve the same purpose? Would you NOT take the relic out and blast away?

Of course you could but 1) as said above an original will cost you $3-6,000 more than a tube gun and that money will buy a lot of ammo. Now if you're very wealthy then, sure, go for it because you probably drive a Tucker, Duesenberg, or Shelby Cobra Daytona Coupe to the grocery store*. And 2) shooting a gun will wear and break parts which is not so much of a problem or impediment but just a shame to be ragging on an original when reproductions (tube guns) are readily available for less money.

If I had an original WWII Sten I for sure would shoot it but probably less than I do with my tube gun, I shoot that a lot.

*Yah, I'm just making a little joke here. We're not talking Elon Musk money for the difference between the two.

 

[USMC1990]

Of course you could but 1) as said above an original will cost you $3-6,000 more than a tube gun and that money will buy a lot of ammo. Now if you're very wealthy then, sure, go for it because you probably drive a Tucker, Duesenberg, or Shelby Cobra Daytona Coupe to the grocery store*. And 2) shooting a gun will wear and break parts which is not so much of a problem or impediment but just a shame to be ragging on an original when reproductions (tube guns) are readily available for less money.

If I had an original WWII Sten I for sure would shoot it but probably less than I do with my tube gun, I shoot that a lot.

*Yah, I'm just making a little joke here. We're not talking Elon Musk money for the difference between the two.

Well….I have the opportunity to get either. Not sure what way to go. Tube gun is is great shape. York Arms. But….original WW II is awesome but cosmetically not as nice but it is like 80 years old. Just on the fence

 

[KickStand]

Well….I have the opportunity to get either. Not sure what way to go. Tube gun is is great shape. York Arms. But….original WW II is awesome but cosmetically not as nice but it is like 80 years old. Just on the fence

What are they priced at?
If you don’t what to say, no worries.

 

[USMC1990]

What are they priced at?
If you don’t what to say, no worries.

About a 2K difference…..which isnt that much. Put $$$ aside….which would you prefer.

 

[Tommyboy]

Well….I have the opportunity to get either. Not sure what way to go. Tube gun is is great shape. York Arms. But….original WW II is awesome but cosmetically not as nice but it is like 80 years old. Just on the fence

I’d go for the WW2 gun mainly for the history and C&R aspect. The gun is so simple in design you can still safely shoot it without worrying about devaluing it and spare parts are abundant and relatively cheap. Bonus points if the gun has its original painted finish with that “been there, done that” look to it.

 

[USMC1990]

I’d go for the WW2 gun mainly for the history and C&R aspect. The gun is so simple in design you can still safely shoot it without worrying about devaluing it and spare parts are abundant and relatively cheap. Bonus points if the gun has its original painted finish with that “been there, done that” look to it.

Does have original finish……at lesst whats left of it. Patinaed finish to grey black in some areas, but cant expect it to be perfect due to its age. Would you be worried sbout welding on this relic.

 

[skoda]

I'm with Tommyboy, get the C&R for that price difference. Unless you seriously plan on shooting the heck out of it.

As far as repairs be it replacing exterior parts or welding, you can usually refinish the new work to blend in with the original finish, so I wouldn't worry too much about that.

 

[KickStand]

About a 2K difference…..which isnt that much. Put $$$ aside….which would you prefer.

I’d get the C&R.

 

[hacker]

I have a C&R and shoot it a lot; you will not wear out the registered receiver. The C&R will be in spec, the tube gun may or may not be. It will always be worth more and usually looks better too. For $2K more, go with the C&R. They are usually a $3K to $4K difference.

 

[atfsux]

Mine is a tube gun, and I'm happy that I can afford to toy with it as I please. The WW2 production units had a horrible quality control record anyway, so preserving a relic of one of these is not preserving much. If it were in as-issued unfired condition, yes, for historic and collector reasons, I'd get that. But I own mine to shoot and enjoy them, and mine is likely more reliable that a wartime production sample.

But oddly, I feel different about my Czech-captured MP-38. It is 100% original, except for some recent replacement underfolding stock components and an extractor now that new reproduction parts are available.

 

[skoda]

Mine has a weird and disfiguring disease:



But I still love it.

 

[USMC1990]

Mine has a weird and disfiguring disease:

View attachment 43850

But I still love it.

Nice disease…..maybe they will come up with a vaccine for that….hahahahahaha