Help with Markings

RockinWR · 06-01-2004, 01:12 AM

Ronnie,
* Commend you for sticking with this thread & responding to my latest set of questions. This has been an excellent example to study and learn from. As you have been into P.08's for a long time, I suspect you knew this already.
* While at this stage it may seem anti-climatic, it is always difficult to convey to a fellow collector troubling news. This example is spurious IMHO. I hope I'm wrong; but, even if I am, this piece would always raise more suspicions than it would satisfy.
- The lack of a hump on the frame indicates the frame at least predates 1937 and is inconsistent with the 1939 upper cannon assembly.
- The "in-the- white" finish inside the frame coupled with the probable "rust blued" exterior indicates the frame predates the 2nd variation 1937 Mauser P.08's.
- The sideplate's "39" is not consistent with the proper inside side plate number expected (35) for a 1939 S/N 3404ns. This plate likely came from a third P.08.
- Interim report observations are confirmed. Now given the pistol's inconsistencies, the e/M lacks that much more credibility as noted by Tom A, Jerry, Blanye, etal. Appears Gerben had a bead on this one too.
* Why you ask?? "MBH" probably knows. Wonder if that stands for "mucho big hombre"? Anyway, a 4-5 times asking price might explain the rationale MBH had in mind.
* I know Thor can do wonders; but, I doubt Tom is into creating a "Humped frame" out of this Weimar handle. The inside well marks or subtle machining differences between DWM & Mauser might just be the next tip off.
* So, as a fellow Texan, I'd recommend you just enjoy this puppy by popping a few rattlesnakes out there & keep 'em west of El Paso for me... OK?. Since I haven't seen any rattlers in these here parts east of you, I know you are already doing a fine job between cobblers.
Thanks,
Bob

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Switch to Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Threaded Mode

06-01-2004, 01:12 AM	#37
RockinWR User Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: D/FW, Tx Posts: 279 Thanks: 109 Thanked 31 Times in 16 Posts	Ronnie, * Commend you for sticking with this thread & responding to my latest set of questions. This has been an excellent example to study and learn from. As you have been into P.08's for a long time, I suspect you knew this already. * While at this stage it may seem anti-climatic, it is always difficult to convey to a fellow collector troubling news. This example is spurious IMHO. I hope I'm wrong; but, even if I am, this piece would always raise more suspicions than it would satisfy. - The lack of a hump on the frame indicates the frame at least predates 1937 and is inconsistent with the 1939 upper cannon assembly. - The "in-the- white" finish inside the frame coupled with the probable "rust blued" exterior indicates the frame predates the 2nd variation 1937 Mauser P.08's. - The sideplate's "39" is not consistent with the proper inside side plate number expected (35) for a 1939 S/N 3404ns. This plate likely came from a third P.08. - Interim report observations are confirmed. Now given the pistol's inconsistencies, the e/M lacks that much more credibility as noted by Tom A, Jerry, Blanye, etal. Appears Gerben had a bead on this one too. * Why you ask?? "MBH" probably knows. Wonder if that stands for "mucho big hombre"? Anyway, a 4-5 times asking price might explain the rationale MBH had in mind. * I know Thor can do wonders; but, I doubt Tom is into creating a "Humped frame" out of this Weimar handle. The inside well marks or subtle machining differences between DWM & Mauser might just be the next tip off. * So, as a fellow Texan, I'd recommend you just enjoy this puppy by popping a few rattlesnakes out there & keep 'em west of El Paso for me... OK?. Since I haven't seen any rattlers in these here parts east of you, I know you are already doing a fine job between cobblers. Thanks, Bob