Mauser P08 Side Plates

Robert Wiggins · 01-06-2009, 07:41 PM

My byf 6168 has some interesting markings on the inside of the side plate. I have two attachments showing both the outside and inside views of the side plate.

QUESTION: Has anyone seen these markings before, and does anyone have any documentation on them.

Best Regards;

Ron Wood · 01-06-2009, 10:08 PM

Not in my area of detailed collecting knowledge, but I am pretty sure that your sideplate is correct with the interior number being one digit higher than the first two digits of the serial number. The circular marks are artifacts of unsmoothed rough milling.

Lugerdoc · 01-07-2009, 09:28 AM

Robert, a #62 on the inside of your side plate would be correct, but the digits should be stamped with the same die set as the numbers on the outside and they are not. TH

Robert Wiggins · 01-07-2009, 10:41 AM

To Lugerdoc & Ron Wood;

Thanks for your replies. I suspect that the stamps on the inside of the side plate are not intended to be repeats of the "68" on the front side of the side plate. I suspect they have other meanings. The stylized rune and the half "o" followed by the "2" probably refer to something not related to the serial# 6168.

I'm hoping someone will have some knowledge regarding this.

Thanks for your input/comments

John Sabato · 01-07-2009, 12:09 PM

Robert... please re-read Ron's comments carefully...

It is "typical" (but not always found) that Mauser produced sideplates have number stamps on the inside that "typically" are one digit greater than the first two digits of the serial number of the pistol. In this case the first two digits are "61" and the insides stamp APPEARS to be "62"... this is a correct condition, but as Lugerdoc has also stated, the number font used to create the inside stamp is USUALLY the same font as used on the outside of the sideplate. Since yours is not, there is a chance that it is a replacement part... perhaps fitted by an armorer... ...and on the other hand, it may be that the pistol builder on that particular day just grabbed the wrong number stamp set when he stamped the inside...

I would interested if anyone else has other theories... or facts! Especially Frank Manders...

Frank, have you got your ears on?

Robert Wiggins · 01-07-2009, 01:23 PM

John;

Thanks for focusing my attention.

May I also draw attention to the stylized rune on the inside of the side plate just left and above the "62" that we have been tal;king about. This rune appears to have been an intended mark. It is clearly not a scratch. Any thoughts on this?

Ron Wood · 01-07-2009, 01:51 PM

It looks like a partially struck inspector's mark. These marks can be found virtually any place on the interior of a Luger and have no particular significance. They are not traceable to a specific inspector or process.

John Sabato · 01-07-2009, 03:19 PM

If you check here http://www.lugerforum.com/lugermarki...tmarkings.html (and click on the graphic) you will see that the sideplate received a small inspectors mark that is not specifically identified. As Ron states above, these marks are not traceable to a particular inspector...

This information was on the Technical Information Pages of Lugerforum.com under "List-1"

I do now know for sure what book this information was sourced from... but it is likely to be from Fred Datig's work...

Robert Wiggins · 01-07-2009, 07:01 PM

Thanks for all your input folks!
It is much appreciated.
I will try to research the inspector's marks to see if I can find a plausible match.

Best Regards;

01-06-2009, 07:41 PM	#1
Robert Wiggins User Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada Posts: 142 Thanks: 16 Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts	Mauser P08 Side Plates My byf 6168 has some interesting markings on the inside of the side plate. I have two attachments showing both the outside and inside views of the side plate. QUESTION: Has anyone seen these markings before, and does anyone have any documentation on them. Best Regards; Attached Thumbnails

01-06-2009, 10:08 PM	#2
Ron Wood Moderator 2010 LugerForum Patron Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Santa Teresa New Mexico just outside of the West Texas town of El Paso Posts: 7,022 Thanks: 1,090 Thanked 5,179 Times in 1,703 Posts	Not in my area of detailed collecting knowledge, but I am pretty sure that your sideplate is correct with the interior number being one digit higher than the first two digits of the serial number. The circular marks are artifacts of unsmoothed rough milling. __________________ If it's made after 1918...it's a reproduction

01-07-2009, 09:28 AM	#3
Lugerdoc Patron LugerForum Patron Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: POB 398 St.Charles,MO. 63302 Posts: 5,089 Thanks: 6 Thanked 736 Times in 483 Posts	Robert, a #62 on the inside of your side plate would be correct, but the digits should be stamped with the same die set as the numbers on the outside and they are not. TH __________________ Tom Heller POB 398 ST.Charles, MO. 63302 Tel 636-447-3006 [email protected]

01-07-2009, 12:09 PM	#5
John Sabato Lifer Lifetime Forum Patron Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: The Capital of the Free World Posts: 10,154 Thanks: 3,003 Thanked 2,306 Times in 1,097 Posts	Robert... please re-read Ron's comments carefully... It is "typical" (but not always found) that Mauser produced sideplates have number stamps on the inside that "typically" are one digit greater than the first two digits of the serial number of the pistol. In this case the first two digits are "61" and the insides stamp APPEARS to be "62"... this is a correct condition, but as Lugerdoc has also stated, the number font used to create the inside stamp is USUALLY the same font as used on the outside of the sideplate. Since yours is not, there is a chance that it is a replacement part... perhaps fitted by an armorer... ...and on the other hand, it may be that the pistol builder on that particular day just grabbed the wrong number stamp set when he stamped the inside... I would interested if anyone else has other theories... or facts! Especially Frank Manders... Frank, have you got your ears on? __________________ regards, -John S "...We hold these truths to be self-evident that ALL men are created EQUAL *and are endowed by their Creator* with certain UNALIENABLE* rights, and among these are life, LIBERTY, and the pursuit of happiness..."*

01-07-2009, 01:51 PM	#7
Ron Wood Moderator 2010 LugerForum Patron Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Santa Teresa New Mexico just outside of the West Texas town of El Paso Posts: 7,022 Thanks: 1,090 Thanked 5,179 Times in 1,703 Posts	It looks like a partially struck inspector's mark. These marks can be found virtually any place on the interior of a Luger and have no particular significance. They are not traceable to a specific inspector or process. __________________ If it's made after 1918...it's a reproduction

01-07-2009, 10:41 AM	#4
Robert Wiggins User Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada Posts: 142 Thanks: 16 Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts	To Lugerdoc & Ron Wood; Thanks for your replies. I suspect that the stamps on the inside of the side plate are not intended to be repeats of the "68" on the front side of the side plate. I suspect they have other meanings. The stylized rune and the half "o" followed by the "2" probably refer to something not related to the serial# 6168. I'm hoping someone will have some knowledge regarding this. Thanks for your input/comments

01-07-2009, 01:23 PM	#6
Robert Wiggins User Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada Posts: 142 Thanks: 16 Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts	John; Thanks for focusing my attention. May I also draw attention to the stylized rune on the inside of the side plate just left and above the "62" that we have been tal;king about. This rune appears to have been an intended mark. It is clearly not a scratch. Any thoughts on this?

01-07-2009, 03:19 PM	#8
John Sabato Lifer Lifetime Forum Patron Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: The Capital of the Free World Posts: 10,154 Thanks: 3,003 Thanked 2,306 Times in 1,097 Posts	If you check here http://www.lugerforum.com/lugermarki...tmarkings.html (and click on the graphic) you will see that the sideplate received a small inspectors mark that is not specifically identified. As Ron states above, these marks are not traceable to a particular inspector... This information was on the Technical Information Pages of Lugerforum.com under "List-1" I do now know for sure what book this information was sourced from... but it is likely to be from Fred Datig's work... __________________ regards, -John S "...We hold these truths to be self-evident that ALL men are created EQUAL *and are endowed by their Creator* with certain UNALIENABLE* rights, and among these are life, LIBERTY, and the pursuit of happiness..."*

01-07-2009, 07:01 PM	#9
Robert Wiggins User Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada Posts: 142 Thanks: 16 Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts	Thanks for all your input folks! It is much appreciated. I will try to research the inspector's marks to see if I can find a plausible match. Best Regards;