If some of you want to go into depth of the Yugoslavian weaponry, you should find a book "Yugoslavian and Serbian Mauser rifles" written by retired JNA Col. Branko Bogdanovic.
Branko is active on several mil surp forums, and participates in discussions. After he retired from the military, he searched archives in Belgrade, and Zastava factory in Kragujevac, and wrote a very accurate book about these rifles.
I never had a chance to read his book, and my knowledge on this subject comes from what I was told in school (in Yugoslavia), and my personal experience with most of the Yugo weaponry in the field. The parts of Branko's book I've seen posted on the Internet, and his information is VERY accurate.
As far as TEAK stocks...........I don't know if any of you remember so called "Mitchell Mausers"? Mitchel is known for "embellishing" with fancy words (tales, half truths, and outright lies) everything they sell. They imported THOUSANDS of nice condition M48s, refurbished them, reblued, etc. and called them "Mitchell Mausers" with teak stocks!!! The teak tale then transferred to later imported weapons like M76, M70 and variants, and thousands of people believe yugo rifles have teak stocks!
They don't. The wood is Yugoslavian Birch, and/or Elm. Both type of woods were used, and covered with BLO and cosmolene, they are indistinguishable from each other.
American company by the name "Ironwood" produces replacement stocks for Yugo weaponry, and they made them out of Teak believing the tale started by Mitchell. Then they analized the wood closely (these people KNOW wood, that's their trade!), and couldn't tell the origin from the composition.
To be honest,.....if you put one stock made from teak by Ironwood, next to Zastava original, you can't tell the difference! If it makes people feel good to believe their stocks are teak,....let it be. Teak is VERY expensive wood, and M48s (and everything else made in Zastava) were mas produced in the Communist country "on the budget". Quality? Yes. Exotic/expensive (which Teak is!)? Definitely no.
|