Dutch 9mm P 24rd & 48rd Tins

These tins were used by the Dutch Navy. The cartridges are all by RWS. The tins come in three varieties,a 24rd tin and two 48rd tins with different labels. All three are pictured below.

Known Dates:

Known Dates:
Juni 1934 (Not in my collection)

Known Dates:
Maart 1937, April 1937
Mei 1938 (not in my collection)
Mei 1939 (not in my collection)

Some of these boxes are known from multiple specimens while others are known from a single specimen.

There is also a square metal container which is extremely hard to find and is not in my collection.
The only two documented boxes are dated Dec 1932.

If anyone has other dates for any of these boxes, please post them or send me a PM.

Note that the tins also occur in 28 round and 49 round labels for the 7,65mm Browning cartridge (AUTOMATISCH PISTOOL No. 3), but that is outside the scope of this topic.


1 Like

Images and posting removed as captions were incorrect (taken from internet before) and confused the readers.

1 Like

The label says it is 49 rounds, but I only count 48 rounds in your picture. And, there only seems to be one full-size pocket empty, that one being, I assume, for the cartridge that is on top of the others, for a good photo of it.

I have seen the 49 round box label with the “49” scratched out and “48” written in. Box printing error, or has anyone got one of these tins marked for 49 rounds that actually has 49 rounds in it?

John Moss

Alex, that internet source is not correct… The pistol number 3 (automatisch pistool No.3) was the Sauer & Sohn model 1930 in 7,65 Browning.

The ones labeled ‘pistool automatisch nr. 1’ are for the Dutch navy, not the East Indies.

The Parabellum used by the KNIL had the designation M11 (1911). The one used by the navy was the Nr. 1.

John & EOD,
I was concerned that this confusion would occur. See the bottom of my first post:

> Note that the tins also occur in 28 round and 49 round labels for the 7,65mm Browning cartridge (AUTOMATISCH PISTOOL No. 3), but that is outside the scope of this topic.

Sorry for the confusion. If the group would like, I can start another Topic on the 7.65mm tins!

Do you have an image of the 49 round tin remarked to 48? sure would be an interesting addition. I have not heard of this one. If it was a label reuse it was probably done after the fact since as far as I can tell, the 7.65mm and 9mm boxes have different dates and I would expect the date to have been changed also. They, of course, also have different size inserts to seperate the cartridges, or so I believe.

Of course you are correct. I was having a dumb moment-or perhaps more than a moment. The error has been corrected.

You do raise an interesting point. Martens and de Vires in their great book “The Dutch Luger” cover the ammunition very well. They refer to the pistol used by the Dutch East Indies Army as the “M11” and the ammunition as the “Patronen Scfherpe No 5” which is written on the boxes. They write that DWM was the sole supplier through the end of WWI and subsequently the ammunition was made by Kynoch and FN. This is consistent with the boxes I have documented with the DWM boxes dated 1915, 1917 and 1918, the Kynoch boxes dated 1922 and 1923 and the FN boxes for the Dutch only dated 1922. The authors also state that the Hirtenberg factory in Dordrecht received a contract in 1930 to make 9mm ammunition for the East Indies Army but there were quality problems and there is no documentation that the ammunition was ever delivered. The drawing shows the headstamp as “H * 1930 *”. This headstamp is known on cartridges loaded with Truncated bullets (the only style used by the East Indies Army until 1940) dated from 1930 through 1933 but no boxes have been documented. Round nose cartridges with this headstamp are know dated 1930 through 1932 but the 1930 & 1931 boxes are commercial Keenfire and the 1932 box was made for a South American Country.

Does anyone have, or have an image of, a box with the "H * 1930 * " style headstamp with a truncated bullet???

Does anyone have an image of any box labeled “Patronen Scfherpe No 5” dated after 1923 or one that has not been mentioned above???

Like everything in this hobby/avocation the deeper you dig the more complex it gets.

Thanks for everyone’s help!


I also discovered an error in my original post. There are two different labels that occur on 48 round tins, not just one as shown in my original post.


Lew, I do not have an image of the tin that I recall seeing, which if I am not hallucinating, had a single diagonal black line thru the “49” with “48” written above it. This may, however, be a false memory. I got my first 48-round tin in the 1970s, from another gun collector (one of which I was, still, at the time).

I do have one however with the 48 obliterated by a big black semi-square (and irregular, as if hand done), and it appears to have 48 handwritten above it. Hard to tell, because part of the "48"marking is gone due to a scuff in the label. Below is a picture, so people can judge for themselves. However, I am the first to say this is inconclusive. The tin’s label is from March (Maart) 1937, so should have been a 48-round label anyway. There is not bottom lid and label for confirmation. Even the brown-paper wrap around the circumference of the tin is not there, with no sign there ever was one, although there likely was. Unfortunately, the bottom label could have told us if this was a purposeful, needed change to the label, or just an aberration.

This could be the tin I was thinking of.

While at it, my 24-round tin is from May 1939, as is one of those you pictured. The handwriting of the “R.W.S. 5/39” is quite different from the one you show. Not important - just confirms that those dates were hand-written, and that more than one person was engaged in putting them on the tins.


These are original labels


original tin’s

pict 2


Gyrojet - Great pictures, of course. However, is there an explanation for the 9 mm tins that show the quantity as 49 rounds, rather than 48? The “49” round tin previously shown on this thread, first the top label, and then the open tin, if I am counting right, only had 48 rounds in it, and no full “pocket” left to accommodate a 49th round.

John M.

Gyrojet, The square box from 1932 has on the right top side a lion with a rifle.
If I remember correctly, it is the marking from Munts Wapenhandel in Amsterdam.

Is this correct? Did the Dutch government ordered this ammunition in a commercial gun shop?


Dutch - you are correct about that mark. I have a Dutch 9 mm box for 30 cartridges that comes from the same company, Munts, Amsterdam, evidently a company founded in 1868 (“Sedert 1868”). It has the exact same “Lion with Musket” trademark as the entire top label of the box. I can show a picture if needed, but since this is about tins, I was hesitant to do so.

Edit: I have the pictures of the above box, so think I will simply open a new thread with them. They really don’t belong on this one.

John Moss

This is a sealed empty (dummy) tin from April, 1937.


Now I must make a crossover to;

For me there is a difference between Police ammunition, ordered after WW2 and Military ammunition ordered in 1932. Why should the Government order ammunition over a civilian gun store like Munts.
Is it possible this cartridge box was not for a non military organisation just like the order from 1946?



Munts was the sole and only Importer for RWS (and later after the War for S&B/Z and other Czech companies) in Netherland.
So, its quit possible, that he was the importer and distributed the goods to the different gov. parts (Police, Army, Marechaussee)
He was that in Netherland, what was done in Belgium from Ambassador Arms for MEN…all Ammo from MEN went trough his hands…
Here a mentioning from distributorship from Munts for various companies (from RWS, Sauer&Sohn, Pieper a.s.o)…Munts was behind the acceptance of the Pistol Nr.3 (=7,65 Br Sauer&Sohn Mod.29) in the Netherlands…
“…Dass sich die Marine für die Sauer entschieden hat, dürfte vor allem auf den Einfluss von Peter Bertus Wilhelm Kersten zurück zu führen sein, der seinerzeit Inhaber und Direktor der Amsterdamer Waffenhandlung Johan Munts war. Kersten, welcher bei Königlichen Marine der Niederlande gedient hatte, war Repräsentant in den Niederlanden u.a. für die Firmen RWS, Pieper, Winchester, Dynamit Nobel, Dürener Metallwerke und der Fa. J. P. Sauer & Sohn, Suhl. [4] Er dürfte über gute Kontakte zu einflussreichen Stellen und Persönlichkeiten verfügt haben - jedenfalls sorgte er entscheidend dafür, dass Sauer den Marine-Auftrag bekam - und nicht nur den, sondern auch Lieferungen an die staatliche Reederei “S.M.N.”, an die niederländische Finanzverwaltung (Departement van Financiën (DvF), konkret an den Zoll) und an die Amsterdamer Polizei.”
I have no time to translate now, but Google will do :-) )

Maybe, that the packings where made in Netherland by Munts, or ordered from him, and packed by Munts with his markings on the boxes…, same as he did with the pistols Mod.29 (Pistol No3) where he made the carton boxes and the booklets (how to use the pistol)…

this mentioned here:
“Der Abnahmestempel Krone/R wurde in den Niederlanden aufgebracht; die Aufbewahrungskartons und Bedienungsanleitungen ließ Munts in Amsterdam herstellen. Bild 3 zeigt das Firmen-Emblem von Munts, wie es auf der Rückseite für die Pistole der Marine bzw. SMN aufgedruckt ist”

In short: He ordered the packings with his Label/Company-sign, and packed this Sauer&Sohn pistols in this new packaging

Thats a possibility…and the packing with the 48 rounds in square box, are in my opinion packed by Munts…


Peter, many thanks for the explanation.

the difference is in the capacity off the magazine 7x7 = 49 or 6x8 = 48

What 9 x 19 mm pistol used by the Dutch, either in the East Indies (Indonesia) or in Holland, held only seven rounds? I know that the Dutch used a lot of Model 1922 Browning pistols in 9 mm Kurz caliber (.380 Auto) domestically - that is, in Holland - but the only 9 x 19 mm pistol I am aware of is the Luger.

I see that the 49-round box is for the Automatic Pistol No. 3, but I am not sure which pistol that was. The original picture on this thread with the “49” cartridge quantity, is immediately followed by an open tin clearly showing 9 mm Parabellum headstamps from RWS. For the 9 mm Short, they used the headstamp caliber marking of 9m/mK.

Just curious.

John Moss

According to de Vries/Martens, the Browning M1922 in the Netherlands was:
M25 No. 1 in 7.65 mm (scherpe No. 19) used by police (Marechaussee, Politietroepen, Rijksveldwacht)
M25 No. 2 in 9 mm (short; scherpe No. 21) was the official army (Landmacht) pistol from 1925 to 1940.
According to data I have, the magazine capacity of the M1922 is 9 rounds in 7.65 mm and 8 rounds in 9 mm short.

Pistool M29 No. 3, not mentioned by them, was the 7.65 mm Sauer & Sohn according to this thread. It has a 7 round magazine as far as I know.

The Parabellum (Luger) was not used in the Netherlands, only by its troops (KNIL) in what is Indonesia today. The Parabellum was called M11 and its cartridge scherpe No. 5. Note that KNIL had its own numbering of cartridges (scherpe No. 5 in the Netherlands was a 9.4 mm revolver cartridge, for example).

I suspect that others are as confused as I am by this thread and hope the above data, mostly from de Vries and Martens helps somewhat.