While cataloging some not-so-recent acquisitions I noticed this headstamp - “8x57JRS 78 MWK”. I was always under the impression that the designation 8x57JRS referred to a rimmed case with a .323 inch diameter bullet. This one has the right bullet but the case is rimless.
Am I reading this wrong or is the headstamp in error?
This cartridge was made in the German Democratic Republic (East Germany) by Munitionswerk Königswartha (Factory 04). They made both the 8x57JS and the 8x57JRS. Yes, in a sense, the headstamp’s caliber designation is an “error.” I say in a sense because it is seen too often and on different dates on the rimless 8 x 47JS rounds to actually be a careless error on the part of the factory. I suspect it was simply an economy move. There actually is a headstamp with the proper cartridge designation for the rimless version. I have the “8x57JRS” headstamp on standard 8x57JS rounds dated 77 and 78, and the 8x57JS headstamp on rounds dated 79, 83 and 88, in my own DDR collection. I have only one specimen of the real, rimmed 8x57JRS made by MWK and it is dated “90” and has much smaller headstamp letters.
Phil, I still collect the DDR cartridges - even Kalashnikov, something a lot of people don’t know. I also break my normal rule for auto pistol rounds, as I did in my 7.9 x 57 collection, and collect every date I can find. I started collecting them through the generosity of a visitor from Germany once who had a ton of DDR ammo with him, he brought over to trade. He actually insisted that I take one of everything he had with him, saying that it was a good field, with enough interesting stuff to make it fun, and that it would have a finite time period - he already knew that the end of the DDR was in sight - so that one wouldn’t have to worry about “keeping up to date” with lots of new dates. I never worked on the collection very hard, but simply because of the time I have had it, I have put together a pretty good collection. I collect all the metallics (the .22s too, but half-heartedly since it is hard to tell what is pre-DDR and post-DDR with the box labels), and I left the shotgun shells alone. I would have liked to have save them too, but it is very hard to know what is actually from the DDR period only.At least, that is my impression. Like any field, there are some that are possibly fakes, especially in the Soviet calibers, but I don’t throw anything away or destroy it until I am positive. I don’t know of any suspected to be fake DDR rounds in 7.9 x 57mm, however, your major field.
[color=#0000FF]Such [/color]rounds were sold with a leaflet saying the round actually was an JS!
When I bought my box in 1990, possibly 91 the leaflet was not even packed with the rounds, instead I had it handed over by the seller. So it looks to me as if this was not “saving” (which would not make a lot of sense, why then a headstamp at all?), it must have been a mistake, uncovered too late.
Both 8 mm rounds were made with either a 10 or 12,7 gram soft-point bullet of basically the same design.
Replaced “[color=#0000FF]Those [/color]” with “[color=#0000FF]Such [/color]”
[quote=“JohnMoss”]This cartridge was made in the German Democratic Republic (East Germany) by Munitionswerk Königswartha (Factory 04). They made both the 8x57JS and the 8x57JRS. Yes, in a sense, the headstamp’s caliber designation is an “error.” I say in a sense because it is seen too often and on different dates on the rimless 8 x 47JS rounds to actually be a careless error on the part of the factory. I suspect it was simply an economy move. There actually is a headstamp with the proper cartridge designation for the rimless version. I have the “8x57JRS” headstamp on rounds dated 77 and 78, and the 8x57JR headstamp on rounds dated 79, 83 and 88, in my own DDR collection. I have only one specimen of the real 8x47JRS made by MWK and it is dated “90” and has much smaller headstamp letters.
WBD - I have edited my first entry. I think it is correct now. This is exactly what I was alluding to in another thread - I am getting very sloppy in my answers, even when I have the cartridges in front of me. Pardon me folks - I have had a hectic year and I think it is catching up on me. Sorry for this error. As I said, the answer should read correctly now.
Hans - I can’t believe it took them two years to discover the error. I suspect the bunters were already made for those years with the “8x57JRS” appellation and they either decided to make only the JS round (I have seen no JRS rounds before the 1990 one, but they certainly could exist - someone else will have to answer that question) or decided to add the JS to the line, but didn’t make a new bunter for whatever reason - economy is the only reason I can think of off hand.
EOD - I don’t have that aluminum round in 7.9 and didn’t even know it existed in that caliber, hence my comment about not knowing of any fake 7.9s. I think there are at least two other fakes in 7.62 x 39 for example, although there is still very big argument over whether or not the aluminum dummies and the wood dummies are actually fake.
Falcon, I’m not really convinced that even all high ranking officials “owned” (in the sense of buying from own money and keep in the own house) their hunting gear. The average hunter handed a hunting club owned rifle in at his club after use, and the rifle was kept and locked in there.
John, my apologies for bad wording. I did not mean [color=#0000FF]that [/color]headstamp (77) in the image in particular but [color=#0000FF]such /color headstamp. The one I purchased in 1990 or 91 has the year 90 in the headstamp and I received the warning note as I described. However there is no doubt in my mind that if the seller would have had such old (1977) ammo as Phil’s in his shelf he would have sold it together with the warning note - as always.
JS years in my records: no year,76[color=#FF0000], 79, 83, 88, 90[/color]
JRS years in my records: no year, 72, 73, 74, 76, 77, [color=#FF0000]78[/color], 79, [color=#FF0000]81[/color], 83, 84, 86, 87, [color=#FF0000]88, 89, 90[/color]
JS marked JRS years in my records: [color=#FF0000]77, 78[/color], 87, [color=#FF0000]90[/color]
[color=#FF0000]Highlighted red[/color] in my own collection
I don’t know why it didn’t correct the first time. I have edited it again and this time it took, and I think I finally have it right. At least you can add to your known ones from Han’s list - he has everything that I have and more on that list, I think.
Again, I apologize to everyone. I can’t even seem to edit a posting and get it posted correctly, anymore!
Thanks. You have a nice collection of these. I would love to find those with no year on the headstamp, and at least one JRS with the large headstamp letters and the correct JRS headstamp marking (I think all the rimmed rounds actually have the correct marking).
I still don’t think the early marking of “JRS” on “JS” rounds continued on as an error. It might have started out that way, but they would have had to have caught this error before they did if they are all simply mistakes.
to start with: you have a talent in getting me find errors in my list: I dont have that JS dated 90, [color=#0000FF]- just find it in Mischinger’s book -[/color] but all other items in my list are good.
Wished it was more complete.
Why don’t you just ask?
You make me think! Mischinger’s book, WBD’s and my list combined: