Witness Marks Report--Revised and Expanded

[Jim Keenan]

That process can be done with careful machining and it was done in the WWII era with M1 rifle and M1 carbine barrels, which do not use draw lines. But I will still stand by the description of the use of draw lines as the way Luger barrels were made and installed.

One point is that if barrels were made, installed, marked, then deinstalled for bluing, the barrel threads should be blued, at least when the hot dip process was used. They aren't, as you can easily confirm by pulling the barrels off a couple of pistols. At the same time, a check can be made to see if every Luger barrel thread start is at exactly the same place. As I recall, they are not.

Another point against that idea is that in the same factory at the same time, Mauser rifles were blued with barrels installed (as barrelled receivers), as shown very clearly in Backbone of the Wehrmacht.

The lines themselves seem to mitigate against your theory. If they were always made with the same tool at the same time, they should, even if reinstalled without perfect alignment, be of the same depth and width. They are not, as the pictures displayed elsewhere show, and as a look at any group of original Lugers will show. It is pretty common for the barrel line to be wider and deeper than that on the receiver or to show tool marks not consistent with those of the receiver line. Examined under a microscope, the lines show definite disjointures which we would not expect if they were done by the same tool.

Jim