Is it just me, or am I the only one to notice that there is no old patination in that wood magazine overstamp? That stamp looks recent. I’ve seen a lot of bogus stamps on Mauser wooden stocks, and the red herrings always seem to lack that nice 50 year old patination in them. I also seem to recall that one armourer’s replacement wood mag I saw had the old number crossed out, and the new over it, with the correct patina. To be fair, I can’t imagine a true fulltime faker trying to pass that lame attempt at making it all matching. Especially with the typical Luger buyer running around with a microscope for inspection. Mag looks like a Bubba special to me.

Correct. The "legitimate" number changes I have seen have always involved simply crossing out the old number and stamping the new. The armorers weren't trying to make it look original, only to keep the pieces together.

O.T., Heydrich, can you e-mail me at keenanj@xecu.net. Thanks.

Jim

Hello Luke,

I cannot tell for sure, but it appears your grip screw(s) are not Erfurt proofed. If they are, they would have a similar but smaller version of the Erfurt proofs that appear on the trigger side plate and the take-down lever, and many other small parts on your gun.

I am not sure how much, if any, these grip screws detract from your pistol's value...

Since your pistol has such a family connection, I would personally not worry to much about screws or a renumbered magazine...

Regards,

Pete... <img border="0" alt="[typing]" title="" src="graemlins/yltype.gif" />

Pete, Tom Heller told me that Erfurt stopped proofing the grip screws later in production but I don't recall the exact date. I have seen 1914 (mine) and a 1916 with proofs, but 1917's and 1918's without.

I wouldn't want to make a call on the originality of the mag number over-stamp but if it was an attempt to deceive anyone, it's a poor effort as the mag numbers do not match the pistol! As I read the mag numbers, they are "2950" or "2930" (and I tend to think they are "2950"). The pistol serial number is clearly 5930. I think it would be interesting to examine the mag first hand.

Here's an enhanced picture of the grip screw. Clearly it doesn't have the Erfurt inspector's stamp on it.
http://boards.rennlist.com/lfupload/...rGripScrew.jpg

I'll try to gain some insight into the re-stamp this weekend (while visiting parents).

Doubs is right - there's no mark at all on the grip screw, and nor is there any mark on the tool in the holster.

Regarding patination, does anyone have any insight into how will the patination develop over time (eg 80 yrs) in the absence of handling or exposure to sun? I had thought that a (if not the) major contributor to patination is handling...

Luke

Patination of wood requires time and exposure to air, not sunlight or human contact. And this film of old wood seems to develop better in the absence of direct sunlight, such as inside a church. A lot of people really like this old look (and smell) in old homes and churches. As a child, I remember seeing ceiling beams in an old German house that reeked of age and patina.

I’m sure that many of the old-time collectors here will understand what I mean, when I write that the woodwork on legit old firearms have a unique look and smell to them. It is something I find terribly lacking and sad with the modern plastic and metal firearms.

Late Erfurts have unmarked screws, period. Let's put that one to rest.

Aaron,

Do you know at what point in production grip screws stopped being inspector stamped? Is there documentation or an observed range? Evidence of a directive?

--Dwight

Very difficult to answer, so all I can do is tell you what I have observed, and that is somewhere around the 1916 "a" suffix unmarked grip screws begin to occur, and by the end of that year just about all did not bear the Erfurt proof. Would like to see some input from other Erfurt owners.

I have a 1916 Erfurt in the "b" suffix range - a police conversion - with original grips and unmarked screws. I also have a .30 caliber rework with all matching numbers except the replacement barrel and the grip screws are not marked. There's no date on the chamber as it was removed but the receiver is notched for the Artillery sight so it's late 1916, 1917 or 1918.

This is an example of a Police arsenal re-stamp

http://boards.rennlist.com/lfupload/re-stamp.jpg

(wish I had the gun to go with it!)

Are my eyes deceiving me or is the safety marked 20 rather than 30 ?

...under maginifaction it looks like a flat topped "3" and a "0" to me Stu... but it looks like a hand stamped "30" that is slightly covered with metal discoloration from age and oxidation on that in-the-white part... that is the best I can make out considering the focus on that particular part...

I could be wrong...(my wife says I am all the time :D ) but if it proves to be a "20" under better focus and magnification I would be surprised...

It sure is unclear in the pic (I couldn't tell either)! I just checked and it is in fact a 30. This weekend I asked about the re-stamp, and it is my father's opinion that the gun came from Europe (in 1918) that way. I guess it will remain a mystery.

Luke

20 or 30...???

Good case point for some of the drawbacks of digital photography...

Sure looked like a "20", but we know from the Owner it is a "30"...

http://boards.rennlist.com/lfupload/ErfurtSafety.jpg

Regards,

Pete... <img border="0" alt="[typing]" title="" src="graemlins/yltype.gif" />

Even in person it was difficult to tell. It took a lot of different angles and lighting to reach the conclusion that it's a 30.

Luke

Pete, I have to disagree...digital photography had nothing to do with the readability of the number stamping... it was all lighting, focus and metal condition... film photography under identical conditions would be no better...