Matching mags?

josef · 07-08-2009, 11:59 PM

Hello Gentlemen,
I am selling a P08 BYF41 that had 2 matching mags. I have had this for some time, and knew the source that it came from before me (which really means nothing as I am learning). Anyway, here are pics of the two matching mags together. I had never doubted the source until now after another member questioned the one mag.
Now I look at it, I can see the overstamping on the one mag. I found this old pic on the forum and would like to use it and have the experts chime in. I would not be terribly upset if it had been messed with as the initial cost was not alot. What would upset me is if I did sell this as a matching 2 mag set and it wasn't.
I think quality control would never tolerate such poor stamping, now that I look at it.
http://reutterwerk.com/lugergallery/...g2_itemId=4088

josef · 07-09-2009, 12:12 AM

And if it is a pooched mag, I'm going to the range tomorrow and blast a few hundred rounds out of this baby I never thought I would fire

jamese · 07-09-2009, 09:15 AM

You are right,
I think the "8" and the "5" have been messed with

chilidawg · 07-09-2009, 02:10 PM

It looks to me like maybe they screwed up the 5 and restamped it with a larger stamp.
The eight looks to be double stamped.

alanint · 07-09-2009, 03:39 PM

The "8" actually looks like it was stamped upside down, the top loop being larger than the bottom one, as compared the the other mag. It looks like the right font. I don't get the overstamp on the five as it appears that the original five below seems complete and in no need of an overstamp.
All the fonts match except the five overtamp so this is a tough call.

josef · 07-09-2009, 05:39 PM

Thank you Gentlemen for your expertise, I am VERY grateful for it. This is from a beautiful BYF41. Here are more pics of the mag in question. Both are FXO and WaA marked the same, and have the same suffix, and show no signs of being removed from the bases. Thank you once again Gentlemen

George Anderson · 07-09-2009, 06:33 PM

Focus on the sevens. They appear to be stamped with the same die as do the six and the suffix. Typically the suffix is always the counterfieters' biggest challenge. I think they are both good.

wlyon · 07-09-2009, 07:35 PM

I agree with George. I have no problem with either. Just another example of a product made by less than perfect humans. Bill

lugerholsterrepair · 07-09-2009, 07:48 PM

Both the 1st & 2nd stamp are a 5. As George & Bill say ....I think it's just a case of a different size stamp racked in the wrong place. Of course one would like to see no discrepancie but I wouldn't reject it for that. Looks good to me.

If it had proven to be a bad stamp I wouldn't shoot many rounds thru a pistol with even one matching mag! Still precious.

Jerry Burney

rolandtg · 07-09-2009, 08:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by wlyon

I agree with George. I have no problem with either. Just another example of a product made by less than perfect humans. Bill

I was thinking the same thing. Made on a Friday or a Monday.

Quote:

Originally Posted by lugerholsterrepair

If it had proven to be a bad stamp I wouldn't shoot many rounds through a pistol with even one matching mag! Still precious.
Jerry Burney

Jerry is right.

josef · 07-09-2009, 08:58 PM

Thank you Gentlemen for your honest assessment of this. It is a beautiful rig, and it was only out of frustration I stated I would go out and fire her. I know I never would have.
I continue to be so grateful for the expertise of you all, thanks again,
Joe

And here is the P08, it's been stored greased up over the years, sorry for the gloss........

MFC · 07-10-2009, 01:39 AM

It appears to me that the large 5 was there before the serial# was stamped. The vertical line of the small 5 covers the top of the loop were it intersects on the large 5.

alanint · 07-10-2009, 09:59 AM

Just as George Anderson said. I wrongly used stamp, (probably placed in the block by accident), followed by a correction using the proper stamp.

alvin · 07-10-2009, 06:43 PM

Now it's becoming psychological

Shouldn't "5" look better on fake matching, shouldn't it be as good as that upside down "8".... The magazine cannot talk. One thing for sure, being doubtful costs $$ as well.

George Anderson · 07-10-2009, 08:04 PM

I think it's a super outfit and wouldn't discount it a dime.

alvin · 07-10-2009, 10:21 PM

Now I am confused. Who's the seller, and who's the buyer?

George Anderson · 07-10-2009, 10:28 PM

All I am is an innocent pedestrian. Just sharing my thoughts.

alvin · 07-10-2009, 10:51 PM

I stared it hard and kind of agree with George. The "5" is OK. The "8" looks upside down. Considering every digit was applied individually, that "8" is definitely possible.

josef · 07-10-2009, 11:22 PM

I was the seller, but I think it's going to stay put for now. I am so grateful for all the comments, Gentlemen, positive and negative. It sickens me that we need to be so careful in our hobby.

DavidJayUden · 07-10-2009, 11:56 PM

Either way, that's one nice 'vidder.
DJU

07-08-2009, 11:59 PM	#1
josef User Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: CANADA Posts: 194 Thanks: 4 Thanked 4 Times in 2 Posts	Matching mags? Hello Gentlemen, I am selling a P08 BYF41 that had 2 matching mags. I have had this for some time, and knew the source that it came from before me (which really means nothing as I am learning). Anyway, here are pics of the two matching mags together. I had never doubted the source until now after another member questioned the one mag. Now I look at it, I can see the overstamping on the one mag. I found this old pic on the forum and would like to use it and have the experts chime in. I would not be terribly upset if it had been messed with as the initial cost was not alot. What would upset me is if I did sell this as a matching 2 mag set and it wasn't. I think quality control would never tolerate such poor stamping, now that I look at it. http://reutterwerk.com/lugergallery/...g2_itemId=4088

07-09-2009, 09:15 AM	#3
jamese User Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: South Florida Posts: 792 Thanks: 0 Thanked 86 Times in 36 Posts	You are right, I think the "8" and the "5" have been messed with __________________ The "truth" is a matter of Perception

07-09-2009, 05:39 PM	#6
josef User Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: CANADA Posts: 194 Thanks: 4 Thanked 4 Times in 2 Posts	Thank you Gentlemen for your expertise, I am VERY grateful for it. This is from a beautiful BYF41. Here are more pics of the mag in question. Both are FXO and WaA marked the same, and have the same suffix, and show no signs of being removed from the bases. Thank you once again Gentlemen Last edited by josef; 07-09-2009 at 10:45 PM.

07-09-2009, 07:35 PM	#8
wlyon Lifer 2X Lifetime Forum Patron Join Date: May 2005 Location: Somewhere in Montana Posts: 2,673 Thanks: 3,243 Thanked 2,658 Times in 988 Posts	I agree with George. I have no problem with either. Just another example of a product made by less than perfect humans. Bill __________________ Bill Lyon

07-09-2009, 07:48 PM	#9
lugerholsterrepair Moderator Lifetime Forum Patron Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Arizona/Colorado Posts: 7,775 Thanks: 4,995 Thanked 3,134 Times in 1,439 Posts	Both the 1st & 2nd stamp are a 5. As George & Bill say ....I think it's just a case of a different size stamp racked in the wrong place. Of course one would like to see no discrepancie but I wouldn't reject it for that. Looks good to me. If it had proven to be a bad stamp I wouldn't shoot many rounds thru a pistol with even one matching mag! Still precious. Jerry Burney __________________ Jerry Burney 11491 S. Guadalupe Drive Yuma AZ 85367-6182 lugerholsterrepair@earthlink.net 928 342-7583 (CO & AZ) Year Round 719 207-3331 (cell) "For those who Fight For It, Life has a flavor the protected will never know."

07-09-2009, 12:12 AM	#2
josef User Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: CANADA Posts: 194 Thanks: 4 Thanked 4 Times in 2 Posts	And if it is a pooched mag, I'm going to the range tomorrow and blast a few hundred rounds out of this baby I never thought I would fire

07-09-2009, 03:39 PM	#5
alanint User Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: Marco Island, Florida Posts: 4,867 Thanks: 1,685 Thanked 1,917 Times in 1,193 Posts	The "8" actually looks like it was stamped upside down, the top loop being larger than the bottom one, as compared the the other mag. It looks like the right font. I don't get the overstamp on the five as it appears that the original five below seems complete and in no need of an overstamp. All the fonts match except the five overtamp so this is a tough call.

07-09-2009, 06:33 PM	#7
George Anderson Lifer Lifetime Forum Patron Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: VA Posts: 3,592 Thanks: 1,773 Thanked 2,531 Times in 788 Posts	Focus on the sevens. They appear to be stamped with the same die as do the six and the suffix. Typically the suffix is always the counterfieters' biggest challenge. I think they are both good.

07-09-2009, 08:58 PM	#11
josef User Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: CANADA Posts: 194 Thanks: 4 Thanked 4 Times in 2 Posts	Thank you Gentlemen for your honest assessment of this. It is a beautiful rig, and it was only out of frustration I stated I would go out and fire her. I know I never would have. I continue to be so grateful for the expertise of you all, thanks again, Joe And here is the P08, it's been stored greased up over the years, sorry for the gloss........ Last edited by josef; 07-12-2009 at 11:22 AM.

07-10-2009, 01:39 AM	#12
MFC User Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Louisiana Posts: 1,237 Thanks: 183 Thanked 281 Times in 162 Posts	It appears to me that the large 5 was there before the serial# was stamped. The vertical line of the small 5 covers the top of the loop were it intersects on the large 5. __________________ Mike C.

07-10-2009, 09:59 AM	#13
alanint User Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: Marco Island, Florida Posts: 4,867 Thanks: 1,685 Thanked 1,917 Times in 1,193 Posts	Just as George Anderson said. I wrongly used stamp, (probably placed in the block by accident), followed by a correction using the proper stamp.

07-10-2009, 06:43 PM	#14
alvin User Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: US Posts: 3,843 Thanks: 132 Thanked 729 Times in 438 Posts	Now it's becoming psychological Shouldn't "5" look better on fake matching, shouldn't it be as good as that upside down "8".... The magazine cannot talk. One thing for sure, being doubtful costs $$ as well.

07-10-2009, 08:04 PM	#15
George Anderson Lifer Lifetime Forum Patron Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: VA Posts: 3,592 Thanks: 1,773 Thanked 2,531 Times in 788 Posts	I think it's a super outfit and wouldn't discount it a dime.

07-10-2009, 10:21 PM	#16
alvin User Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: US Posts: 3,843 Thanks: 132 Thanked 729 Times in 438 Posts	Now I am confused. Who's the seller, and who's the buyer?

07-10-2009, 10:28 PM	#17
George Anderson Lifer Lifetime Forum Patron Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: VA Posts: 3,592 Thanks: 1,773 Thanked 2,531 Times in 788 Posts	All I am is an innocent pedestrian. Just sharing my thoughts.

07-10-2009, 10:51 PM	#18
alvin User Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: US Posts: 3,843 Thanks: 132 Thanked 729 Times in 438 Posts	I stared it hard and kind of agree with George. The "5" is OK. The "8" looks upside down. Considering every digit was applied individually, that "8" is definitely possible.

07-10-2009, 11:22 PM	#19
josef User Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: CANADA Posts: 194 Thanks: 4 Thanked 4 Times in 2 Posts	I was the seller, but I think it's going to stay put for now. I am so grateful for all the comments, Gentlemen, positive and negative. It sickens me that we need to be so careful in our hobby.

07-10-2009, 11:56 PM	#20
DavidJayUden Patron LugerForum Patron Join Date: Nov 2008 Posts: 4,047 Thanks: 578 Thanked 1,414 Times in 887 Posts	Either way, that's one nice 'vidder. DJU