ron,

i know not much about the 5-digit-luger
but, when the 8 was added later, how does it work, that the s/n on the frame is still rather centered with the 8?
was the old s/n removed before?

mysterios, yes, thats true ;)
and btw, thank you for your efforts! i really appreciate that! :cheers:

regards
klaus

Ron,

There was a recent posting of a 1921 DWM 4312b with the grip strap marking S.A.K.3.24. Although it has no sear or mag safeties, I have been thinking it was a police marking from the Schupo of the Aurich district. Is there a Reichswehr unit that would fit this marking?

Klaus,

The most plausible explanation I have heard for the 1921-dated DWMs with 8xxxx serial numbers (some with an "a" suffix) is that they were assembled by DWM after the IMKK shut down their production of military/police Lugers in 1921 from parts originally intended for military/police sale. At least some of these parts may have had four-digit serial numbers that were "commercialized" by appending an 8. Some, but not all, of these have the serial number off-center on the frame suggesting the addition of an 8. However, yours looks more like the final 4 was a late addition!

All I can say is that this is the best theory I have heard so far.

Hi Don,

S.A.K.3.24 could be Sanit�¤ts Abteilung Kraftfahrpersonal 3 weapon #24. It doesn't quite conform to regulation, but would be close.

Your explanation of the 5 digit SN could be on the money. If the 4 digit number began with an 8, it makes sense that they would have left it as is and added the last digit. In this case a 4.

Ron

Guys,

I wouldn't be so quick to ascribe this to one of the "digit-added" pistols. 87424 is in a broad range of serial numbers (84864-89564) several of which have 1921 dated chambers and WaA. One is reported with sufficient detail to include the full suite of WaA inspection and acceptance marks, and one (a different one) has a Reichswehr unit mark. I'm not convinced about adding a 4 at the end; note that the breechblock is numbered 24.

Klause,

Are the other parts of the gun numbered similarly, 24? Also, it looks like the serial number on the left breechblock may overstamp another figure. Is there a crown-over-N stamped there? Also, what are all the marks on the barrel?

--Dwight

actually Dwight, it was the "8" that was added previously. Both this one and the one by taudelt I looked at very close.


Ed

Also. Are the #'s on the side plate and takedown in the commercial or military style? Are there any 24s stamped in the hidden stye on the toggle train? My first thought was like Dwight's, that it started out as a commercial.
Mike C.

hi,

every part has its 2digit s/n-stamp, how its known from the military lugers.
the sideplate has also (additional to its military stamp) a "24"-stamp on its underside, were the commercial were stamped
the hold-open has none s/n, it seems to be replaced.

the barrel is stamped with the hole s/n "87424" and the diameter "8,84".
at top (about 1 o'clock) eagle as proof-stamp (the same how its seen on the receiver).
no crown/n stamp to find.

no, its the bad pic

the sideplate inside and the center toggle on its underside are stamped with "874" - the first 3 digits of the s/n.

if i compare the stamp-size with other lugers, the stamps on the sear bar, the trigger, the sideplate (military-style) seem to be a number too big.
they all are clear and do not look overstamped.

regards
klaus

Dwight,

Would you agree that the date stamped on the chamber indicates that this part probably was originally intended to fulfill a military/police contract?

Don,

All 40-50 thousand military and police contract 1920-1921 production Lugers were, no letter suffix, a and b suffixed. approx. 40 thousand procured for Police, approx. 10 thousand procured for Military with approx. 4 thousand going to the Navy. The dove proofs are found only on 1920-1921 production lugers.

Ron

And these were made in direct contravention of the Treaty of Versailles. By the treaty (and interpretation by the IIMK), the only manufacturer of P08's was Simson; so P08s were specifically made for commericial and police contracts, even if that is not where they "ended" up. Especially in 1920 and 1921, the german gov't was too weak and too poor to re-arm without it being obvious. Over the next 5-7 years they made guns more openingly for the military, but in 1921, I do not beleive they were made for the military AND sent there. I do believe they ended up there, but when the IIMK visited the major arms manufacturers (specifically DWM), I believe they would state they were only making pistols for commerical and police usage.

Ed

I'm still very new to this, but want to learn.
Could this be similar to the 1908 comm./ military contract?
What do you guys think of the sideplate being stamped in the comm. style,as well as military?
Mike C.

Klaus: every part has its 2digit s/n-stamp...the sideplate has also (additional to its military stamp) a "24"-stamp on its underside, were the commercial were stamped...the barrel is stamped with the hole s/n "87424" and the diameter "8,84"â?¦at top no crown/n stamp to find

Klaus,

Thanks for the information about the absence of c/N, and the serial number placement and your comment about the serial number size discrepancy. This all suggests to me that the gun was indeed a commercial Luger, and that the serial number is indeed originally 87424. Upon completion it apparently was taken from the normal commercial production chain (it would have been sent to the state proof house for commercial c/N proofing), and instead sent to the Waffen Amt (Weapons Office) for inspection and acceptance. Since the WaA was responsible for accepting guns for both the army and the police, the WaA stamps alone cannot reveal this gunâ??s ultimate destination.

Don: Would you agree that the date stamped on the chamber indicates that this part probably was originally intended to fulfill a military/police contract?

Don,

Iâ??d like to know more about the actual contract and supply conditions in 1920-1921 before I came to such a specific conclusion.

I have been thinking a lot about the 1920-1921 chamber dated commercials in the context of commercial Luger production, and it has led me to speculative questions in a different direction.

We know from anecdotal comments attributed to August Weiss that DWM used up everything in production of Lugers. We see evidence that this included scavenging of contract parts for inclusion in commercial pistols, by the Swiss cross and circle-B Brazilian barrels which show up on commercial guns. Conventional wisdom has it that rejected military contract parts were used in commercial production, and indeed the existence of a commercial Luger with a large-flange Navy toggle pin, and several guns with faulty slide guides, would seem to confirm this (I have speculated elsewhere that wartime commercial production was based entirely on rejected military parts).

1920 and 1921 dated commercial Lugers appear sporadically between sn 83970 and sn 7307 i. Although many of these dated pistols have police and Reichswehr characteristics, most do not (a striking number of 1921 dates are found on Krieghoff back-frame marked pistols). There are no later dates on any DWM-manufactured Lugers, military or commercial. I am forced to wonder if these dated receivers were actually removed from the 1920-1921 military production batches, due either to overrun or inspection failure, and included in commercial assembly? This would make these gunsâ?? return to WaA acceptance completely coincidental and the circumstances of their shipment unknown.

Ed: And these were made in direct contravention of the Treaty of Versailles. By the treaty (and interpretation by the IIMK), the only manufacturer of P08's was Simson; so P08s were specifically made for commericial and police contracts, even if that is not where they "ended" up. Especially in 1920 and 1921, the german gov't was too weak and too poor to re-arm without it being obvious. Over the next 5-7 years they made guns more openingly for the military, but in 1921, I do not believe they were made for the military AND sent there.

Ed,

If I remember correctly the IMKK production contract assignment to Simson was let in 1922, which is why there is 1920 and 1921 DWM WaA production, but none later. Also iirc, Simsonâ??s contract was for both Reichswehr and police production. DWMâ??s loophole was that they were still permitted to perform military pistol rework conversion (Gibson, canâ??t find the citation right now).

My recent reading suggests that the conventional wisdom concerning the relative postwar poverty of German industry (particularly the arms industry) and the covert nature of rearmament is not representative of the true circumstances.

--Dwight

"I am forced to wonder if these dated receivers were actually removed from the 1920-1921 military production batches, due either to overrun or inspection failure, and included in commercial assembly?"

Dwight,

This is what I meant. Another possibility is that these receivers were in the military production line when the IMKK shut it down.

Something to remember in the equation. The majority of military and police 1920-1921 production dated guns are found in the no suffix, a or b suffixed range. Indicating that there must have been a pre-designated gov't procurement contract in place.

Ron,

Don't forget the n-suffix series in 1920.

Don, who was the n suffix for? That is a new one for me?

Ed,

See this thread: http://luger.gunboards.com/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=5948 .

I don't think these were for a single contract. I have records of these with police markings from Prussia, Saxony and Thuringia. As you will see from the thread, there is at least one with Reichswehr markings.

Interesting, i did remember the thread when I went there. What an odd suffix letter to "start" or end on...

Don,

You are correct. I had forgotten about this thread. I have yet to see a 1921 M or P marked pistol out of the ns,a and b range. Of course there are probably a number of things that I haven't seen.

Ron