Early DM 7.92x57 dummy?

I recently acquired this round, and as you know, am no specialist in this calibre.

It appears to be an early dummy. Unfortunately the headstamp is very finely stamped on a dark background and I was not able to get a decent picture, but it is “18 DM 98 0” with the “DM” in the twelve o’clock position.

The “bullet” is made from sheet and closed with a four petal crimp and the primer pocket filled with a lead/solder material. The whole round has a bronzed appearance but that may be aging. It is in mint condition with no primer strike. Total weight is 281.0 grains.

All and any information appreciated.


Tony, could you please check your head stamp again.
In 1898, D.M. used a 120° head stamp like D.M. 7 98
In 1900 the 90° head stamp was introduced.


It is very clearly a four position headstamp!

I will try to take a better picture later.


I may be off-base here, but…
I have 7.65 x 53.5 Mauser cartridges, several loaded and several dummies, that have headstamps like:
D.M. (at 12 o:clock), 18 (at 9 o:clock), 98 (at 3 o:clock) and K (Karlsruhe) at 6 o:clock, so a four position headstamp was used on this caliber at least as early as 1892…( D.M. 18 92 K.)
Why not on 7.92 x 57 ?



You looked good.
Found a Picture in my files.


Randy: The DWM headstamp on the 7.65 m/m cartridges is in their commercial style; the three position stamp was for German military contract. Virtually all early 7.9 m/m was for the German armed forces, but maybe not all of it & perhaps the dummy shown has a commercial origin. Jack

Yes, that is exactly it.



I just looked in my old 7.9 cartridge collection catalog, and I had an identical dummy round, same exact headstamp except that mine was dated 96. Same blackish primer pocket filler. I don’t know what the “O” meant. Mine was mint to. It was the only one like it I had/have ever actually seen. They seem to be quite a rare type and headstamp. I wonder if there was a “97” date?


If I remember well, this pickture was made in your ammo room.



If that is the case, then my records must be wrong. For headstamps like that in my catalog, I drew them from the cartridge. I guess I could have read it wrong, although when I went to search my catalog, I remembered my round as being the same as the one pictured, except for being a “96” date.

For now, despite the “evidence” of what I wrote down, I guess we should consider that the rounds are from 1898 with the faint possibility that other dates exist. I wish I could remember who go that round from me. I thought it was you, Durtch, to be honest. I will check with someone else.