Third Party Press

Help to identify Radom magazine please

rpf2697

Senior Member
Hoping some of you more experienced Radom collectors can identify this magazine. I feel that it is without question a post war aftermarket mag and the follower and baseplate do not resemble any of the originals or those shown in my Radom collectors book.
 

Attachments

  • 86534C3A-38BF-44CE-91F1-E27E589D4D7A.jpg
    86534C3A-38BF-44CE-91F1-E27E589D4D7A.jpg
    366.2 KB · Views: 125
Really need a few more photos showing the baseplate, rivets holding the baseplate, and the follower. Never saw any Radom mag that looked like that.
 
Unfortunately I don not have more photos. There are no rivets holding the base plate. It is pressed .
 
Never saw such a thing. Here’s two late mags, one with the stamped follower which is the last type.

577485f7d4672ce1d24f4eb83288fffd.jpg


bd28531ec1ed1da2639b7d5f4f640127.jpg


bf0744b4d1d0d4d94b9fe4d64e014cf2.jpg



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Those are the same two types that I have in my collection. The one above that I included a photo of looks just like the aftermarket magazines. No pins and a rounded edge on the forward of the base plate, not square like my originals.
 
More pix of the welded seam on the back, detail on the base/body joint and the parkerized follower would also help. You might also show the screwdriver dent in the follower where you tried to take it apart.
 
More pix of the welded seam on the back, detail on the base/body joint and the parkerized follower would also help. You might also show the screwdriver dent in the follower where you tried to take it apart.

It would be helpful and appreciated if you could post detailed pictures so a proper evaluation could take place. I would be glad to but the magazine is back in your possession.
 
The mag is a late one and not very common. The return wouldn't have been a problem if you hadn't screwed-up the follower making it unsalable and then tried to get a refund before I saw the damage. Your tracking number is 9500 1119 3413 8146 2861 45. When you receive it, please post more detailed photos of its construction and the proof on top of the toe. The world wonders...
 
The mag is a late one and not very common. The return wouldn't have been a problem if you hadn't screwed-up the follower making it unsalable and then tried to get a refund before I saw the damage. Your tracking number is 9500 1119 3413 8146 2861 45. When you receive it, please post more detailed photos of its construction and the proof on top of the toe. The world wonders...

I never damaged your aftermarket magazine that sold as original. Those are the facts. No knowledgeable collector would support your claim it is an original magazine. You were wrong to sell it as original to me and you are wrong to claim I damaged it. Nobody would put a screwdriver to a magazine for any reason. Wrong tool. You lack integrity and knowledge.
 
Not now, not ever, junior. Grow up, stop lying and learn from your mistakes. BSing Paypal was not smart. You got a rare mag at a bargain price and don't have the knowledge base to appreciate it. We are always learning in this field and the information gained from this forum is ample proof of this. We never really see it all.
 
I agree with Farb, good pics Mike. I have never seen an original VIS/Radom mag like that and I have collected them since 1981. A good friend of Polish origin asked me to assist a display of his lifetime collection at the NAPCA. Wow. He had two Second A blocks in very thick phosphate. He had every block and every year of production, multiples of several and many of his collection is in York's book. He did not have a mag like that. It looks very much like a repro that I had but got rid of.

If you can find a picture of a mag like that in York's book, or another reliable reference, please tell us.
 
Until the book on P.38 mags came out, many of those that we dismissed as repros twenty or more years have been determined to be legitimate. Sorry guys, but although damaged through carelessness, the mag is original to that period. No one makes only one or two repros of anything unless it's a Rembrandt. Thanks to this forum a lot of misinformation concerning 98K's has been corrected and that being said, you guys should know better. I can list Lugers, holsters and yes, Mauser rifles that the unknowing have all insisted were non-existent but exist, nevertheless. In fact, one fairly unique G.98 in my collection that has generated a lot of pure BS has been authenticated by knowledgeable members of this forum who refreshingly, take a sound academic approach to the subject. In conclusion, had the mag in question been returned undamaged for any reason whatsoever, the refund would have been automatic. Petty extortion is another matter and I didn't expect that here.
 
More pics always help. Talk is not helping much here.

The owner refused to provide detailed photos to share on this forum. I returned it fir a refund because I was certain beyond doubt it is a Post war reproduction. I only had the one picture I posted that I took when it arrived to send to a fellow collector for another opinion. I returned it for a refund and somehow it was damaged when it was received. It was never damaged by my holding it in my hands. The magazine is being returned to me even though it should not be. When it arrived I will gladly mail it to you Mr. Radford to evaluate. I respect your opinion on the matter without question. I should have know. An $80 magazine would not be original. The money is not at all the issue. The issue is the completely innapropriate, unprofessional, disrespectful behavior of a fellow forum member that is unecceptable and insulting. When it arrived , I will ship it out to you after I submit plenty of detailed pictures.
 
I hope that some of the experts joining the discussion are at least familiar with the thinly parkerized late wartime P.35(P) mags with the welded rear seam and either a number or letter on the top of the toe. I have never seen one of this variation Waffen Amted, perhaps someone has. Surely, someone considering himself an authority on this subject can find an example or a at least a picture of one for comparison. These are a known variation and while not rare, they are at least seldom encountered. The mag in question is identical in construction and as decent photos will reveal, has a follower of the same shade of parkerizing. However, like some very late P.38 mags, the body of the mag has absolutely no trace of ever having been finished.The top of its toe is marked with either a B or an 8, I don't recall which. If nothing else, this may evolve into at least a learning experience of some value to forum members. None of this is rocket science. Otherwise, the BS has become beyond tiresome.
 
Last edited:
I hope that some of the experts joining the discussion are at least familiar with the thinly parkerized late wartime P.35(P) mags with the welded rear seam and either a number or letter on the top of the toe. I have never seen one of this variation Waffen Amted, perhaps someone has. Surely, someone considering himself an authority on this subject can find an example or a at least a picture of one for comparison. These are a known variation and while not rare, they are at least seldom encountered. The mag in question is identical in construction and as decent photos will reveal, has a follower of the same shade of parkerizing. However, like some very late P.38 mags, the body of the mag has absolutely no trace of ever having been finished.The top of its toe is marked with either a B or an 8, I don't recall which. If nothing else, this may evolve into at least a learning experience of some value to forum members. None of this is rocket science. Otherwise, the BS has become beyond tiresome.

I own several of the late clear/thin finish mags, including one with an acceptance on the back. I also collect late Radoms, have for years, and have owned my fair share of them. I have 5-6 phosphate late Radom mags right now as well, and have never seen this type of mag as original. That said, not enough photos have been posted to make any determination regardless, so we wait for that.

Screaming that the buyer is a "scammer" is not helpful and won't get the issue resolved. Truth be told, selling items without photos will eventually get you right here. I can see your say the BS has become tiresome - the onus to prove the magazine is real is actually on YOU, as you sold it as original, and so far you haven't done that. If the buyer damaged the mag, that will be an issue if the mag is real, but if it's not real it's not an issue. First things first.
 
oldcorps - can you show me why you think your magazine is real, and not one of the Sarco repros?
 

Military Rifle Journal
Back
Top