41-42 n suffix style

[DavidJayUden]

I'm not scared of the gun at all, but the mag. does look like it could have been filed down and possibly re-numbered. Not that the suffix dies could not differ, I'm looking at the flat spots to the left of the mag. #'s.
Or maybe it's just my imagination. I will await a verdict from the senior members.
dju

[Chris from Minnesota]

David your eyes do you well, there are what do look like several flat spot along the bottom of the mag. The only thing that makes me think that it's original is how the numbers closely match the style of the other stamped numbers on the pistol.

Chris

[Jason L]

Nice gun! I believe it is a "p" block/suffix not "n". The tail is missing from the stamp. I would say the mag is incorrect.
Cheers,
Jason

[Chris from Minnesota]

Originally Posted by Jason L

Nice gun! I believe it is a "p" block/suffix not "n". The tail is missing from the stamp. I would say the mag is incorrect.
Cheers,
Jason

That has crossed my mind but I find that the p and this n are some what different or at least the p on my byf differs from this n suffix style. Here are two photos one is the 41-42 the other is a 41 byf.

[Chris from Minnesota]

Hear are some better close ups of the two different suffixes.

[tharpo]

Chris,
The style of the n suffix was different when comparing the magazine and the frame in 1941. Go to page 654 in The Mauser Parabellum and you will see your magazine matches as the book photos are from magazines. Here is a picture of another matching 41-42.
I got faked out on this a while back in a discussion on Jan Stills Forum. It looks to me you have a very nice gun. Also notice the "3"s are flat top on the magazines and rounded on the front of the frame.
Tom