7,92 Mauser


#1

What do I have here both cartridge is 7,92 Mauser but what dos The color means,
the friend who gave the cartridge to me had a few of the same kind.


#2

Ohms, what are the headstamps? Are they consistent within the two different paint schemes, e.g., are all the rounds with the light painted case headstamped identically?

.


#3

My first thought is that someone’s children went wild painting daddy’s cartridges to make them pretty!

Seriously, I have seen a number of cartridges that kids have painted for their fathers. With some serious effort I was able to turn a pink 7.92 Panzerbusch into a very presentable cartridge. No, my kids did not paint it!


#4

I think that Mr. Ohms would appreciate a serious answer to his question. I have seen many rounds that I thought were ridiculous fakes only to find out they were absolutely legitimate. In this case, Mr. Ohms, everything I know about the 7.92 Mauser from collecting 12,600 specimens of that caliber would tell me that these are not factory items with those colors, and probably not done by an “official source”, regardless of the headstamps. However, that said, if they were mine, and I could not corroborate that fact, I would simply set them aside. I did that once with four 9mm Para rounds I thought were all fakes, and all four turned out to be absolutely genuine, positively identified by two friends, Curtis and Woodin, at one time or another. I still own them, of course, but they are now in my main collection. Cartridges, once acquired, don’t require feeding or much care. It hurts nothing to put them aside in a drawer until such time as you are satisfied that they are fakes, or that it can be proved that the colors are genuine, done for a real purpose of identification. Again, though, my own belief is that they are not factory original in that state. Iconoclast asked the right questions!


#5

Here is The headstamp from the cartridge


#6

On at least the round whose headstamp is pictured at the top, you can plainly see the original green primer seal, indicating standard type s.S. ball. I would think that this is further evidence that the paint on the cartridges is not original to any German use of them. The bottom headstamp is quite nice. “P162” was the only company other than “Polte” §, just off the top of my head, that used the Numerical code in combination with “St” indicating a steel case. I have five or six lot numbers of this unusual headstamp. This code represents Presswerk G.m.b.H., Metgethen/Ostpr. (East Prussia), who shortly after switched to code “hrn.” Again, my opinion that the paint is not original to German use is based only on the tens of thousands of 7.9 x 57mm cartridges, of German origin, that I have examined over the years. Just because a cartridge has not been seen before doesn’t mean, of itself, that it is not original. Especially since the opening of the East, we have seen ammunition made by the Germans or under their authority that we had never seen before, some 50 years after the end of War. One should weigh these rounds separately, and then compare the weights to standard type s.S. ball rounds. The overall cartridge weight should be somewhere near from 400 to 406 grains, having a bullet weight of approximately 198 grains. If they weigh as normal s.S. rounds, that would be another point of evidence against the paint being original.


#7

One would be very irresponsible as a parent to allow children at the age where they would want to do that sort of thing to be allowed to get hold of live ammunition. I imagine all hell would break loose if a child took one of these “pretty painted cartridges” into school to show their friends and a teacher saw it.


#8

The lot P162 VII fa1 1 41 was of St-lack sS cartridges


#9

As the paint appears somewhat thick, I’d question if it would allow chambering in a weapon or test chamber Unless it was just done for "show & tell"
Just a thought, but why paint the complete round, most (that I’m aware of) experimental military rounds only have perhaps a paint daub, or small bar, stripe or some such easily / quickly applied markings. Plus to do an overall marking the Gremans (and others) usually used a chemical not a paint coating.
All that said I’d agree with John to set them aside untill proven yea or nay.