German 9x19mm "suk - St+ 1 45"

Got a bag of these without a box. I don’t see “suk” a lot. How uncommon is it?

Vlad - it is not a rare headstamp, but less common than some of the other codes. The code “suk” is from Deutsche Waffen- Munitionsfabriken A.-G., Werk Karlsruhe. It was a late-war change from the code “faa” which evidently the Germans feared had been compromised.

The DWM Berlin-Borsigwalde code was change also, about the same time, from “asb” to “rfo.”

DWM Lübeck-Schlutup was changed from “edq” to “tko.”

The only other code change that I am aware of was much earlier, and involed number codes, with “P67” being changed to "P69) (and then with the adoption of the letter codes, to “ad>” This was the factory Patronen-, Zündhütchen- und Metallwarenfabrik A.-G., vormals Sellier & Bellot, Schönebeck/Elbe. This change was on the 7.9 x 57 mm cartridge.

Oh, there was one more change I just thought of. The code “Pak” , perhaps a mistake in reading the protocol for the then-new letter codes, was changed to simply “ak” to be in line with the other letter codes assigned. That was Munitionsfabriken vormals Sellier & Bellot, Prag, Fabrik in Vlasim.

Nice find.

John Moss


What is the meaning of the long dash at the 2 o’clock position?

I don’t have many German military 9mm but I haven’t seen any suk available here.

One flash hole

1 Like

Regarding the flash holes, I found an interesting anomaly quite by accident, some years ago. The 9 mm Para round with headstamp “rfo St+ 3 45”, despite not having a dash on the headstamp, is a single flash hole case. Lot 4 of 1945 for “rfo” has the dash and, quite properly, also has the single flash hole. I wish at the time that I had duplicates of the lot 3 to pull apart, to see if this was simply a case of changing the flash hole number after the bunter was already made, and using that bunter anyway, or if the one I found is simply a manufacturing defect. If anyone has a couple of dupes of “rfo St+ 3 45” thaqt the don’t mind disassembling, it might be interesting to see what is there so we aren’t going by a single specimen.

John Moss

1 Like