Simson "sneak" re-work?
 

Is there any definitive way I can tell if I managed to score myself a Simson sneak re-work?

Reason I ask...the shop I bought the piece in had received it not more than an hour earlier (talk about being lucky in stopping off at the proper time), and when I asked about it, I was told "It might have been refinished...which is why there's no date on the barrel hood, or maker's mark on the toggle; it looks like they were buffed out."


However, the serial numbers were there (including the one on the breech block, where the maker's mark would be), as were the proofs, which made me wonder. All the serial numbers seemed to match up, even though it appears they were either re-stamped, or stamped again in a different spot (I found different numbers on the bottom, underside, etc of things when I disassembled it). The magazine didn't match, but the price they were asking for it, I figured it for a shooter/bang-around Luger, and not a safe queen. The serial number itself is XX81U. All the pieces are marked 81, except the barrel, which is marked 81U (to match the frame)...and there's one other part that I can only see as being marked as 86, but in a different font? That same number (86) is also stamped on a bunch of other parts, in a different font as well, hence my total confusion at this point.

Another reason I didn't totally buy the re-finished theory was that the straw looked somewhat worn, and the safety marking still had a minute, but visible, amount of white paint in it (a bit darker with age and whatnot, but you can still tell it was painted). If someone was going to refinish it, there'd be no trace of paint, and the straw would have probably been redone. I think. As you're probably guessing, I'm new to this :)

It wasn't until I broke out the "Lugers At Random" book I have here and started to decipher things, where I kind of got a little..excited, I guess. Unfortunatly I don't have a copy of Mr. Still's book available :(

I don't have photos; it's night out, and I dont' have any decent lighting to do so. I'll get some tomorrow. However -

Visually, proof-wise, it checks out identically to the photo on page 241 of the book. It has an eagle-6, a WAA66, and another eagle on the barrel, all on the right side. Left side, there's an eagle on the breech block. The barrel is not nitro proofed. All the numbers APPEAR to match, but again..as it looks like there was some re-stamping, I can't be totally sure :( But, according to the description about parts possibly being re-numbered in a different lettering style and such..well, you can see how an imagination can run rampant.

There's a more-or-less-normal chip/missing sliver of wood on the left side grip panel under the safety; at least I know someone other than me took off that grip panel.


As you can imagine...if it IS a Simson re-work, I'd be quite excited. If it turns out to be a total mixmaster, well, then the primary purpose of purchasing it (as a shooter) would be fulfilled, and I'll still be very happy with it.

So..is there any real way to tell if it's a Simson, or just some humped up piece, or..?



Thanks so much for your help!!


I'll try to get photos and post them ASAP tomorrow. One of these days I'll need to invest in a good close-up lens...


Edited to add: It DOES have the sear safety on it, as well as the stock lug.

Ed, why do you think it is a Simson and definately, why a "sneak"...

More than likely a DWM "sneak"...

No marking on the toggle?

Ed

The only marking on the toggle is "81", matching the last two digits of the serial. The main pin in back is also marked 81. There's no other makers marks on it...no dates, no logos, nada. Unfortunatly the stampings on the right side of the frame do seem to be a little buffed, or lightly struck :( I can't make out the 3rd marking, but there is definitily something stamped there...eagle with a 6 under it, WAA 66, and then some other stamping, in order from back to front on the right side. Then, of course, the straw eagle, I guess it could be called? On the barrel, in-line with the receiver markings.

On the top of the Luger, literally, the only marking is that 81 on the piece where a manufacturer's logo/mark would normally be.

Could I be that wrong?

Erp, edited - the extractor is also stamped 81, so...yah, only two markings on the top are the 81's on both extractor and on the toggle.

Also, don't know if it matters or not, but on the magazine..well, I guess? Bottom of the frame, on the rim of the grip, the front is stamped on the bottom "170." (at least, it looks like a period, if a bit high for one), and "8 1" on each side of the rear of the grip, straddling the magazine well.

I'll post photos of it tomorrow.

ed, it does sound like a "sneak", the u suffix is correct, if so and not refinsihed, you did well :)

Here's some photos:

http://www.misplaced.net/~obremski/l...0341-small.JPG


Full-size photos are available here.

It's worth noting that the 86 on the sear bar (I think it is? I don't have a parts diagram in front of me) matches similar 86 markings on the inside of other parts (like the left side plate is marked 86 inside of it, etc)

Either that (and the magazine) are the odd men out, or it just wasn't remarked? I don't really know.

Also, on the safety, that is indeed green paint in the indent there. I don't know if it's original or not. Unfortunatly I don't have enough lighting to pick out the detail, but there is definitily traces of white in the safety marking.

I could be wrong (again!) but this piece looks like a Simson police rework of the Weimar period. Note the sear safety. Also of note the magazine appears to be an Erfurt pre-1915 (two imperial proofs).

Does it have any evidence of a marking on the front of the grip strap?

Don, no, it does not, not that I can see or feel... Just that 170 marking in the photo above.

Edited to include I also looked inside the front strap when I had the grips of (Sorry, didn't check for pencil/markings inside the grips at the time), and didn't see any indentations...it was one of the things I was checking for.

Ed,

I don't know about the "Simson rework" aspect but this appears to be one of the Lugers manufactured by BKIW in 1929 just before the transfer to Mauser. Most of these with t and u suffixes went to the police as did yours. It has a sear safety and remnants of a mag safety. The front of the grip strap apparently was never marked, indicating it went to a police unit that did not mark its weapons according to Prussian regulations for the Schupo or Landj�¤gerei. It may have gone to a Kommunal- or Gemeindepolizei unit. These units, if they marked weapons at all, used a variety of formats. I suspect the 170. is the weapon number for this particular unit.

In my opinion, the "sneak" designation is a misnomer. I don't think it was an attempt to be sneaky since the IMKK had departed two years earlier than this pistol was manufactured. Some of the pistols in this serial range had DWM logos and some were blank. It is more likely that they fillled the order for police pistols with whatever components were immediately available and this included some blank toggles.

Understood...my understanding of the era between wars is rather empty to begin with. I thought all blank hoods/toggles and K marked barrel hoods were considered "sneaks"...I really need to pick up some more books on the subject.

One project for tonight is to again fully disassemble it, but this time actually document what's marked and numbered where; something I neglected to do last time.

Given all of that, did I just pick myself up a shooter, or is it something I should lubricate and store away? Is it more collectors piece? If I can take the thing out and use it for it's intended purpose and not worry about breaking it, or wearing it more, then fantastic. If it's something better off being preserved and put away, that's just fine too...I just don't quite know which way to go with this one.


Also, if this posting would be better served by moving it to the "new collectors" forum, then no worries moving it there...I didn't even spot that board my first time through the forums.

Thanks!

E-Ed,

This is a very interesting gun. I'm looking forward to your detailed marking documentation, any photos would be a bonus. Of particular interest are the frame front, left receiver, and witness mark area.

--Dwight

Dwight, I checked the barrel witness mark (but neglected to photograph it); the mark is uniform and straight, indicating that it was not rebarreled..or if it was rebarreled, it was done with such precision that it would be impossible to tell either way. The line's indentation and depth match and line up.

The left receiver is blank as is the takedown plate, and the frame front (ahead of the trigger guard) just shows the serial number/letter.

I'll get photographs of it all tonight, provided I can get my work area clean enough to photograph :)


One thing I did notice when I was checking it again last night; on the front of the front sight base (front being muzzle-side), there's an R (or a B perhaps?) stamped. I didn't notice it before.

What I cannot photograph I will write down; as you can tell from the above photos, I lack a decent tripod :)

Again, thanks!

Here we go..

Full left side shot - any splotchy areas, sorry, that's oil..notably above the magazine release.

http://www.misplaced.net/~obremski/l...0361-small.jpg

Close up, left side:

Edited to add - you can clearly see the 96 (not 86, 96) on the sear bar - just wait, it gets weirder further on. I was willing to chalk that one up to "it's a replacement" but I'm not so sure - you'll see in a bit.

Anyway:

http://www.misplaced.net/~obremski/l...0363-small.jpg

"R" on front sight base:

http://www.misplaced.net/~obremski/l...0367-small.jpg

Bottom of frame and where it meets the barrel:

http://www.misplaced.net/~obremski/l...0369-small.jpg

First bit of weirdness:

This is inside the left side cover...note the 96, and the big "1" stamped in it on the inside:

http://www.misplaced.net/~obremski/l...0372-small.jpg

And now for the other weird part:

http://www.misplaced.net/~obremski/l...0373-small.jpg

That's what is stamped on the BOTTOM of that very same left side cover.

Now, since to remove that sear bar to stamp it, it would require undoing that sear safety. I'm doing a WAG and saying they never restamped it because it was more of a pain in the rear to remove the sear safety, stamp, and put it back together than it was worth?

Total WAG on that...

Here's the bolt assembly..81 and eagle on the left side of the bolt:

http://www.misplaced.net/~obremski/l...0375-small.jpg


The firing pin was NOT numbered. There was no stamped number on it or the firing pin plunger, anywhere on the part that I could see.

The ejector was also unnumbered, since I'm mentioning unnumbered things.

Now for a bit more weirdness:

Here's the BACK of the bolt, and the underside of the toggle:

http://www.misplaced.net/~obremski/l...0378-small.jpg

There's a big 86 stamped on the back of the bolt head, and a small K stamped underside of the toggle.

Here's the underside of the slide assembly...

http://www.misplaced.net/~obremski/l...0385-small.jpg

The witness marks line up, there's a K stamped down there as well.

Okay, looked at everything.

Three possibilities:

1. A non "sneak", a true rework, i.e. older, probably ww1 then totally reworked in the late 1920's, early 1930's.

2. "sneak" (I dislike the term sneak as much as Don, although it is a correct terminology in the luger field, so you were correct Ed), however, a DWM, NOT simson rework. Unless it has eagle 33 or eagle 6 somewhere, then it can very well be Simson rework. The 81 is a commerical stamping, better chance that this started as a commerical, bought by police and ended up in the service, being reworked thus the 86 and the official looking 81's at the same time.


3. started as a late 20's DWM, then was reworked, it appears to have no halo, thus reblued at one point. This is why the 86 and the official looking 81's at the same time.



Ed

Here's a quick tabulation of what's numbered and what isn't, and where:

Bolt Hold Open: Unnumbered
Take down lever: 81 - marked on bottom (visible in one of the photos above)
Safety lever: 81 - top
Safety bar: 81 - side (visible when engaged)
Trigger: 81 - left side on top, under cover
Frame: 3681u
Cover: 96 - inside with a big 1 on a different orientation and plane
81 - on bottom outside
Bolt: 81 - left bottom, eagle left top
86 - back
Ejector: unnumbered
Sear bar: 96 - left side
Firing pin and plunger: unnumbered
Extractor: 81


Grips, I didn't see any pencil markings on the back of them, nor did I see any numbers engraved or carved in to them.

The magazine was photographed previously; there are no markings I can find on the body, and it's a single-pin floorplate.

Any of this helpful? :)

If there's any other information anyone needs or could use, please let me know; I'll gladly photograph and/or transcribe what I see.

Edward, that's just it...if I look at the first proof on the right side just right, I can make out the six under the eagle.

The problem is capturing it on film, or on electrons :(

http://www.misplaced.net/~obremski/l...0393-small.jpg


Larger versions of the images are again available here. That image should be the last one in the list.

EEd,

Thanks very much for the additional pictures.

And Ed, I was writing this while the two of you posted your last messages, so this edit is playing catch-up.

This gun appears to be a standard u-suffix 29DWM which went directly to the German Weapons Office (WaffenAmt) to be inspected and proofed for Police service, rather than to the commercial proof house which serviced DWM. The right receiver, breechblock proof, and barrel marks--particularly the e/WaA66--and the absence of c/N proofs demonstrate this. There is another 29DWM in the Commercial database, sn 4140u, which is marked the same way.

(The absence of any e/6 (or e/33) inspector stamps pretty much eliminate any Simson connection.) I'm not sure what to make of the 6 under the eagle which you percieve. This suggests to me the WAG that the e/6 inspector may have performed part of the final inspection process, either at the Simson factory or at his home office. This does not necessarily imply a Simson "rework" function.

The serial number on the rear toggle pin indicates that something was done concerning this gun after 1932. 29DWM converted to Police use often have numbered toggle pins. This could have been done at a weapons depot. It remains an open question as to when these guns were sold, where they went, and when they were put into service. I believe that Don Maus's Police studies can help sort this out.


Alphabet DWM and 29DWM Commercial Lugers are commonly found without firing pin serial numbers.

The 86 on the rear face of the breechblock is also proper, a number different from the gun's serial number is usually found here on Alphabet DWM and 29DWM. I don't have any records of these numbers being found on other parts.

The presence of K on various parts of this gun is intriguing. Although the witness mark is aligned, it is not a single stroke and so cannot be used as an indicator of anything.

--Dwight

Dwight, and Edward both, thank you. I found some photos of the eagle-over-6, and you're both correct...the six is very distinct in those photographs. The eagle on mine isn't nearly as clear. Well, that's one less thing I'll have to wonder about :)

So this gun looks "proper", in it's current form? That is, it's not a mixmaster, or something someone threw together for the heck of it?

Can I safely take it out and use it as a shooter, or is it something I should put into my collection as a keeper but only occasional shooter, and find something more appropriate for range use? I'm embarassed to say what I paid for it, but when I bought it it was priced as a very cheap range blaster. VERY cheap range blaster, which is what I was intending to use it for until I got curious and opened a book.

This is only a start, but why I questioned it being a simson rework...

www.simsonlugers.com


you are welcome to shoot her, but if you break a part, there goes collectable.. might be better to trade it for a shooter plus some cash or buy another...

E-Ed,

Your Luger is certainly proper and not a "mixmaster". It has some unique characterisitcs, but I wouldn't call it "rare".

Personally, I wouldn't shoot it, but I have a couple of Lugers specifically reserved for the purpose. You can probably shoot it with relative impunity. I would recommend that you pick up a couple of modern mags--Mec Gar are good--or some fxo mags for shooting. The 90-year-old early Imperial Erfurt magazine with the gun will likely not allow the gun to function well, and it is rather valuable on its own account.

If you picked up this gun really cheap you got a pretty good deal.

--Dwight

Again, thanks, both. Edward, yes, that site was one of the ones I referenced earlier when looking for eagle-over-6 stamps...boy, mine looked nothing like that.

Dwight, I just emailed you concerning the commercial database, thanks.

Again, thank you so much, this place is proving an invaluable resource.