BYF 41 question

Roh · 10-08-2015, 04:13 PM

Greeting to all, from South Florida,

I have noticed, certain BYF 41s, the details of E/655 E/655 right receiver acceptance stamps are very light or faint, barely readable,

and on others they are very crisp.

I just purchased a BYF 41 " Black Widow" serial # 8906z, black grips, I cannot tell if its e/655/655 or e/655/135.

All the other proof markings are fine, I do not suspect that it has been re-blued.

Can anyone tell me according to the serial number, if it should be e/655/655 or e/655/135, also the approximate month/year of production.

Thanks to all,

Robert

mrerick · 10-08-2015, 06:55 PM

Need the suffix letter under the serial number digits on the front of the frame... sn 8906?

Also try for a better closeup photo of the proofs themselves...

Marc

DavidJayUden · 10-08-2015, 07:47 PM

He described it as 8906Z.
dju

mrerick · 10-08-2015, 10:01 PM

Ah... missed that.

The "Z" block should be all SE/655 SE/655.

The first of the ones with SE/655 SE/135 and SE/135 SE/655 are documented after about 6700ns in the no suffix block that followed it. After about 2,100 guns they were all SE/135 SE/135.

DonVoigt · 10-08-2015, 11:08 PM

Sure looks like that area of the receiver has been polished, thus reducing the depth of the markings.

DavidJayUden · 10-08-2015, 11:52 PM

I'm voting for original/unmolested. But missing the takedown retention spring.
dju

mrerick · 10-09-2015, 06:25 AM

The proof area of my 41 also has that soft appearance, but I know it's all original.

I think that they were overusing the dies, and that they dulled over time.

Marc

Vlim · 10-09-2015, 08:41 AM

I think it may be a combination of variations in hardness of the receiver, variations in buffing before blueing and the stamping of the markings themselves.

John Sabato · 10-09-2015, 08:59 AM

Marc, you should take some time to visit my old friend and lifetime forum member Frank Manders in Phoenix, AZ. He has been our resident Mauser expert for literally years. You two would have a lot in common...

mrerick · 10-09-2015, 10:39 AM

I'm just thankful for the research published by Don Hallock and Joop van der Kant!

It would be good to meet others interested in Mauser. Been awhile since I visited Phoenix, though...

Gerben's observations are also very likely reasons for the soft edges on these proof marks...

Cheers! Marc

Roh · 10-09-2015, 12:35 PM

Thank you all for your input,

I was researching Luger.Gunboard and came across the following information from comments in 2010.

It collaborates with Vlims's comments, if the receiver was proofed and then polished and blued... it would look washed out or faint.

BYF 41, details of E/655 E/655 right receiver acceptance stamps. In most cases the receiver was polished/blued after application of the acceptance stamps and proofs. These are often more washed out in comparison to the barrel acceptance stamps and proofs.

Jan C. Still

10-08-2015, 04:13 PM	#1
Roh User Join Date: Aug 2015 Posts: 7 Thanks: 0 Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts	BYF 41 question Greeting to all, from South Florida, I have noticed, certain BYF 41s, the details of E/655 E/655 right receiver acceptance stamps are very light or faint, barely readable, and on others they are very crisp. I just purchased a BYF 41 " Black Widow" serial # 8906z, black grips, I cannot tell if its e/655/655 or e/655/135. All the other proof markings are fine, I do not suspect that it has been re-blued. Can anyone tell me according to the serial number, if it should be e/655/655 or e/655/135, also the approximate month/year of production. Thanks to all, Robert Attached Thumbnails

10-08-2015, 06:55 PM	#2
mrerick Super Moderator - Patron LugerForum Life Patron Join Date: Dec 2009 Location: Eastern North Carolina, USA Posts: 3,907 Thanks: 1,374 Thanked 3,108 Times in 1,509 Posts	Need the suffix letter under the serial number digits on the front of the frame... sn 8906? Also try for a better closeup photo of the proofs themselves... Marc __________________ Igitur si vis pacem, para bellum - - Therefore if you want peace, prepare for war.

10-08-2015, 10:01 PM	#4
mrerick Super Moderator - Patron LugerForum Life Patron Join Date: Dec 2009 Location: Eastern North Carolina, USA Posts: 3,907 Thanks: 1,374 Thanked 3,108 Times in 1,509 Posts	Ah... missed that. The "Z" block should be all SE/655 SE/655. The first of the ones with SE/655 SE/135 and SE/135 SE/655 are documented after about 6700ns in the no suffix block that followed it. After about 2,100 guns they were all SE/135 SE/135. __________________ Igitur si vis pacem, para bellum - - Therefore if you want peace, prepare for war.

10-09-2015, 06:25 AM	#7
mrerick Super Moderator - Patron LugerForum Life Patron Join Date: Dec 2009 Location: Eastern North Carolina, USA Posts: 3,907 Thanks: 1,374 Thanked 3,108 Times in 1,509 Posts	The proof area of my 41 also has that soft appearance, but I know it's all original. I think that they were overusing the dies, and that they dulled over time. Marc __________________ Igitur si vis pacem, para bellum - - Therefore if you want peace, prepare for war.

10-09-2015, 08:59 AM	#9
John Sabato Lifer Lifetime Forum Patron Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: The Capital of the Free World Posts: 10,153 Thanks: 3,003 Thanked 2,304 Times in 1,096 Posts	Marc, you should take some time to visit my old friend and lifetime forum member Frank Manders in Phoenix, AZ. He has been our resident Mauser expert for literally years. You two would have a lot in common... __________________ regards, -John S "...We hold these truths to be self-evident that ALL men are created EQUAL *and are endowed by their Creator* with certain UNALIENABLE* rights, and among these are life, LIBERTY, and the pursuit of happiness..."*

10-08-2015, 07:47 PM	#3
DavidJayUden Patron LugerForum Patron Join Date: Nov 2008 Posts: 4,047 Thanks: 578 Thanked 1,414 Times in 887 Posts	He described it as 8906Z. dju

10-08-2015, 11:08 PM	#5
DonVoigt User Join Date: Apr 2015 Location: near Charlotte NC Posts: 4,681 Thanks: 1,441 Thanked 4,350 Times in 2,040 Posts	Sure looks like that area of the receiver has been polished, thus reducing the depth of the markings.

10-08-2015, 11:52 PM	#6
DavidJayUden Patron LugerForum Patron Join Date: Nov 2008 Posts: 4,047 Thanks: 578 Thanked 1,414 Times in 887 Posts	I'm voting for original/unmolested. But missing the takedown retention spring. dju

10-09-2015, 08:41 AM	#8
Vlim Moderator Lifetime LugerForum Patron Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: Europe Posts: 5,053 Thanks: 1,036 Thanked 3,987 Times in 1,205 Posts	I think it may be a combination of variations in hardness of the receiver, variations in buffing before blueing and the stamping of the markings themselves.

10-09-2015, 10:39 AM	#10
mrerick Super Moderator - Patron LugerForum Life Patron Join Date: Dec 2009 Location: Eastern North Carolina, USA Posts: 3,907 Thanks: 1,374 Thanked 3,108 Times in 1,509 Posts	I'm just thankful for the research published by Don Hallock and Joop van der Kant! It would be good to meet others interested in Mauser. Been awhile since I visited Phoenix, though... Gerben's observations are also very likely reasons for the soft edges on these proof marks... Cheers! Marc __________________ Igitur si vis pacem, para bellum - - Therefore if you want peace, prepare for war.

10-09-2015, 12:35 PM	#11
Roh User Join Date: Aug 2015 Posts: 7 Thanks: 0 Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts	Thank you all for your input, I was researching Luger.Gunboard and came across the following information from comments in 2010. It collaborates with Vlims's comments, if the receiver was proofed and then polished and blued... it would look washed out or faint. BYF 41, details of E/655 E/655 right receiver acceptance stamps. In most cases the receiver was polished/blued after application of the acceptance stamps and proofs. These are often more washed out in comparison to the barrel acceptance stamps and proofs. Jan C. Still