My Profound Thanks dear Mr Librarian !!!
The above 2 pics are one’s I’d heard of but never seen.
Please see PM, and You shall know some background. 
Kindest Regards, Uyraell.
What a fascinating and informative thread. For the record, gentlemen, I liked all the “Gustav” line (purely on aesthetic grounds: I’m not a technical expert). Just a minor, nitpicking observation on Panzerknacker’s early post (#41): “13mm MGs” had me thrown for a while. Did this version perhaps have extra MG-131 7.92mm MGs?
Cheers,
Cliff
Despite the increased power output of the various engines powering the Gustav models, the G series were the worst-handling of all the 109’s, until the advent of the Spanish and Czech versions, the Hispanos and CS’s respectively, which were even worse in regard to handling. Yes, the G series were the fastest versions, but required an almost fully open throttle in the landing circuit, and were vicious, bordering on fatally malicious in both take-off an landing characteristics.
That said, I agree the G’s look good, especially the G10.
As to the 13mm MG’s, these replaced the 7.7mm Mgs as (in part) an interim measure pending the availability of the MG151/15mm Mg’s. themselves an interim pending the availability of the MG 151/20 mm Mausers, which were replacing the MG FF which had lacked somewhat in performance terms. As a result, there were up to 4 different “acceptable” weapon sizes able to be fitted to almost any of the E or F series 109’s.
Other, wiser heads than mine can go into more detail, but I hope this admittedly brief and simplified answer is of use to you. 
Kind Regards, Uyraell.
Thanks for that, Uyraell. Goes to show that you never stop learning: I wasn’t aware that 13mm MGs were even produced. (And my apologies to Panzerknacker for suggesting he might be mistaken.) As a matter of interest, would the German 13mm be able to chamber US Browning .50cal (12.7mm) rounds?
Cheers,
Cliff
You’re most welcome, CliSwe.
I’m not certain the German 13mm weapon would have been able to chamber the US 12.7mm (.50 cal) rounds.
Tony Williams, or Panzerknacker will know more in detail, as that topic verges on arcanae that I have been remiss in studying.
Off the top of my head, I think there are enough significant differences in the respective cartridge cases to prevent such an experiment being successful.
I certainly would not want to try that experiment.
Addendum: I’m not exactly certain how this all fits together, so, the experts will have to fill in the blanks or correct me as necessary.
The 7.7mm becomes the 7.92mm. Later experiments produce both 10mm and 13mm weapons. The 13mm becomes the 15mm, which in turn becomes (briefly, I think) 17mm then 20mm, resulting in both 15mm and 20mm Mauser Mg151 versions. Meanwhile, the MGFF in 20mm is quietly retired off, because of feeding problems , slow rate of fire, and low velocity. However, that in turn creates shortages of the Mg151-20mm. This results in certain units, such as maritime recce and maritime strike, being outfitted with a variety of french weapons, rechambered for German ammunition.
Kindest Regards, Uyraell.
The E- version, for esthatic reasons only. I like the straight and clean lines of it, the square wingtips finish that of very nicely in my eyes. Again some good reading here…, tanks & greetings stano666
Bf-109E for me. It just looks perfect.
beautiful pic this is, you happen to know wich E it is, and what cannons ?
2 X 7.9 mm in cowling 2 X 20 mm in wings i guess, but motorcanon i’m completly unsure of, anyhow this photograph screems “build model in 1/72 of me” to me, and i will (if you don’t mind) after i’ve finished my He 111-H 2 or 3 and Ju 290 A-7.
Greetings stano666
Methinks 2 x MG FF (or MG FF/M) in wings, and no motor cannon. But more likely only barrels that pretend to belong to a real cannon
(despite not being an expert , and despite a 12 month old post )
The US .50 cal was much more powerful than German 13,1mm, so re-chambering would´ve been a major task, and, if acomplished in quality, would´ve added weight to the MG. Thus the main advantage would´ve been negated, or indeed canceled out.
For the calibers:
Germans never employed 7,7mm (= .303), their rifle-caliber was 7,92mm. The MG 131 (using the round from Mauser TüF rifle of 1917/18) was produced because it offered much better effect on target than 7,92, while allowng it to be mounted on places the 20mm cannons would not.
As for the MG 151, it was produced indeed as 15mm 1st, but since the 20mm version (MG 151/20) offered twice as heavy shell, it was used mainly because the 20mm version lacked numbers produced.
The main advantage of 151/20 vs. MG FF/M was that it was belt-fed - much more flexible than drum-fed weapons fro aircraft usage.
I like the BF-109 G but I prefer the FW-190 Dora 9 it is faster more maneuverable and harder hitting
Contemporary of Dora-9, the Bf-109K-4, was faster & harder hitting…
yeah a K4 would be my plane too… :
I like the F series.
Wow I colored that photo.Glad you liked it enough to use it for your example. 
Wel, i like to fly simmulation games like IL2 sturmovik. And i always prefer the F-4 , F-2 or the G10
offcoarse the K4 is verry fine as wel.
greetings,
Johan
I’ve seen drawings of a radial engine 109, looks cool. Personally I like any that still fly.
Dear Friends,
This is my first topic here.
I was looking for a “diferent” Bf-109 and found here the amazing Preussenblitz profile.
The profile was so inspiring then I decide to make one in a Group Build of plastic models brazilian website.
It is not complete yet.
Soon I will post some pics.
Cheers,
Helder “Luft46” Millani
I have one model in resin 1/48 scale. It is very unnusual and funny plane.
Soon I will put it on “production line”.
In 1992, I had retired and was working as a golf marshall in Kingwood, Texas. One of the men I worked with had been an ME 109 pilot during WW2. He was a most friendly and interesting man, and I really enjoyed our many conversations. I have no idea which varient he flew. I have lost contact with him, but hope I to re-establish contact.