luger 1915
 

hello. i am sorry to say i know nothing about computers and there icons and i hope rhis goes thru. i ahve a luger marked 1915 on top of the breech in my researches so far i have found that it is all original markings for a military piece but between the serial # and the witness marks under the barrel is a # 8,82 and on the handle down from the trigger gaurd 3.ch . can anyone tell me what they are. by the way what are tags that can be added to a thread.

Hello roc, WELCOME !!!

The number on the barrel "8,82" is the measurement of the bore diameter in millimeters. The size of a rod that will just fit into the barrel. Hope this helps! :)

thank you. what about the # on the handle below the trigger gaurd?

I'm guessing that those could be regimental markings, but would need to see a photo or at least a detailed description. Get us the info. There are guys here that can look at those and tell you what the soldier had for lunch...
DJU

thanks i will try to get some pictures

Hi Leroy,

How is the marking on the grip stamped? Is it 3.ch. or 3.Ch. Without seeing photos of the exact marking, it could be 3rd Chevaulegers (Light Cavalry) Regiment. If there aren't any other numbers or letters, it is most likely a "Stab" or Staff pistol. Meaning that it was more or less held in reserve for issue as needed and never assigned to a Squadron.

Welcome to the forum..

Ron

Ron, than it would be a Bavarian (cavalry) unit and a B. should be with the unit mark.
Regards Klaus

hello ron. the markings are with the large letters. 3.CH.

I have some pictures but I DO NOT KNOW HOW TOSEND THEM. DO iSEND THEM TO WWW,LUGERFORUM.COM/?

Sorry about the capital letters

roc. You can send the photos to my email. I will do the job if you want.
grafschaft@gmx.de
regards Klaus

You don't "send" photos, you upload them to a thread ;).

See posting by Ron on your other thread.

Use the Manage Attachments; although they have to be small enough....


Ed

Here's the markings...finally. Thank God for my daughter!

Looks like "the other Ron" (Ron Smith) got it right...3rd Chevaulegers (Light Cavalry) Regiment staff. That little snapshot is a teaser, the gun looks to be in great condition. Please ask your daughter (thank God indeed!) to help post more pictures of this piece.

Turned your photo around so as to get a better look.

Klaus,

Would the B still be applied to a Stab marked Luger? It certainly looks to be a 3rd Chevaulegers Staff pistol mark to me.

Ron

We all know the D.V.E.Nr.185 â??order for stamping the handgunâ?� from January 1909. This one was a Prussian order.

When we look at the Ulanen (Lancers) for example we have some problems. Prussia had Ulanen regiments 1 to 16 and Bavaria had 1. and 2. Lancers Regiment. We know that the unit marks on the Bavarian guns came with a B. Maybe the reason of the missing of the B is that the Prussian Army does not have Chevaulegers. Chevaulegers were only in Bavaria. We can compare them with the hussars.

Because the holsters for the units in the German Army in Imperial time came from the clothing depots (Bekleidungsämter) the D.V.E.Nr.185 was not for the holster and the other equipment. The Bavarian holsters are all without the B in front of the unit marks.

Yes Ron, you are right: Roc´s Luger is from the 3 Bavarian Chevaulegers regiment staff. I attach some photos of other Bavarian Chevaulegers Lugers and their holsters. The 1. Chevauleger Luger is with the B, the 2. not. The unit marks on the holsters are without the B.

Roc, it would be nice to see some more photos of your Luger.
On the Landau list are the Lugers of the 3. Chevaulegers enumerated. Your Luger should have Nr. 106 or 113 or 120. These 3 numbers are listed with the staff.
Best regards from Germany klaus.

thanks to all . iwill try to get more pics. bye the way do you know of any history on the gun

"We all know the D.V.E.Nr.185 â??order for stamping the handgunâ?� from January 1909. This one was a Prussian order. "

klaus 3338, can you explain in more detail the meanig of the D.V.E.nr.185.. please.
Alf.

Alf, sorry, but you must help me: We all know... ...in more detail the meaning ...!
I´m sorry but I think I do not understand. What should I try to explain, please?
My English is not the best!