First Luger - info & comments - New Photos added
 

Looks like it's in nice shape. Any education is appreciated.

Numbers seem to match #6651 with matching magazine.


http://i872.photobucket.com/albums/a.../Lugera031.jpg

http://i872.photobucket.com/albums/a.../Lugera002.jpg

http://i872.photobucket.com/albums/a.../Lugera001.jpg

http://i872.photobucket.com/albums/a.../Lugera010.jpg

http://i872.photobucket.com/albums/a.../Lugera014.jpg

http://i872.photobucket.com/albums/a.../Lugera003.jpg

http://i872.photobucket.com/albums/a.../Lugera004.jpg

Thanks for your attention!

I have seen mint examples before that were real, but they really need to be looked at closely.

So, question to yourself; where did it come from, i.e. what dealer?

There is no wear, which is highly unlikely, but possible.

Take a small flashlight and shine it at the finish, it should show kinda a slight rusty look, to be missing this is a sign it might be reblued; as any gun over 55 yrs old is going to have patina.

The magazine serial number, I'd like to see it where I could blow it up and look at it?
Further, a picture or two from the sides, it is either photo trickery, or its been ground and restamped.

We actually prefer pictures to be hosted here on the forum, as photobucket pictures usually disappear after a while...

Welcome to the forum,

Ed

Hi Rand, Welcome to the forum. Posted guns are subject to consensus review on this forum. My one vote says your Luger is in superb, original condition. Regards, Norm

My vote sides with Norm.

Well, I was just wondering guys! ;)

I noticed the clean lines, and all, although were mausers this smooth on the rear area originally? No swirl marks?

And I'd like to see the mag still, but overall, I think I'd like to look at it in real life, but she is nice!


ed

Silly newbie question. Should it have P 08 on the frame?
Thanks for your patience.

No P08 on the side for another year. Are the grips numbered/marked?
Very nice.
dju

I vote with Norme. VERY, VERY nice. Exceptional. I'd like to see it in person too! Right in my gun safe.

1940 42s, estimated 135,700 made from the Z block to the N block. The P.08 on the frame wasn't until 1941, then the four digit date was changed to two digits.

I like it too!

I'm pretty sure FNorm meant 1940, not 1949!! :D
After all, he missed the proper key by one!! :D

Looks like FNorm fixed it -- GREAT!!! :D

No. I vote professional restoration. A nice one. :)

Edit: As Ed mentioned, there are no end mill cutter marks on the frame ears. In fact, that area looks almost blasted...

I think it is a very nice job...Maybe even one of Thor's...

I say original...

I'm not 100% onboard with the mag and barrel numbering, and the checkering on the grips seems a bit course, but I really can't say. Actually several numbers seem less than perfect, but who can say. Also a bit more of a brushed look to the metal prior to bluing, but not over buffed.
Is the mag a wrap-around body or extruded. Seems like we should see the bottom hanging out a bit more on this late of a gun.
Postino, why do you vote no?
I vote "I don't know" and will sit back and see what the experts say.
dju

Condition
 

I had to look at my 1941 byf to see what you experts are referring to. The fine scratched in lines seen here are not on mine. My just has a general sheen under or in the blued areas.

I would be proud to own that one also. Too perfect.

Mine has the tool marks in the ears area.

I traded for mine in 1988 from the guy that traded it from a German officer in Germany in 1945.

He never fired it. I have after cleaning. I like shooting it.

Don't understand the percent of finish judgements? Mine has very light wear on the rear and side of the barrel and the side plate and a few pits on the bottom of the barrel under the sight area.

Beauty marks to me.

Matching but mag. Nice grips.

Just feels good in your hand.

Really informative stuff here. How do I post pictures?

Mauser was in obendorf? Same as h&k? Like my 911?

Newby bob

I say extremely nice restoration. No visible wear on trigger plate or side rails for a 69 year old gun, not too likely.

Excellent piece though.

I think this one would have to be fondled a bit before I gave an opinion. It looks good ,but the pictures are really not good enough to be certain. IMO the mag looks OK, but the ears look like they have some grind marks on them .....could be a red flag.

Shouldn't this one have the extruded mag. body and the pinned bottom?
dju

dju, this magazine is correct for an early 1940. The E/655 magazines were used along with 122 magazines from the no suffix block through the D-Block. They were pretty much phased out by the F-Block.

I keep looking at the " one" on the frame SN and it just worries me along with the perfect finish.

I actually see a messed with "3" , there should be no doubt on a perfect gun.

Pretty gun though, just needs to be looked at very carefully buy any buyer ( always good advice)

Vern

dju, this magazine is correct for an early 1940. The E/655 magazines were used along with 122 magazines from the no suffix block through the D-Block. They were pretty much phased out by the F-Block.

Frank:
Are you saying that the bottom is correct (unpinned) or that the wrap-around body is correct? I'm no magazine guy so I'm trying to learn here. Seems to me that this one should have the extruded mag. body that hangs down a bit in front.
Thanks;
dju

Hi David, The crimped, blued steel mag (Type II Army) was phased out between the n.s. and d blocks, and replaced by the extruded steel mag with the squared off bottom (Type III Army). Here are photos of a y suffix 1939 42 with Type II mags and an h suffix 1940 42 with a Type III. Regards, Norm

Thanks for the ongoing education.

I purchased it from a local dealer without knowing anything about Lugers or this gun in particular.

I'll take some more detailed photos when I get a chance.

Thanks for the lesson Norm!
dju

All I know is that its a very impressive gun...usually refinish guns have smooth round edges these one in particular are straight???

It all depends on who did the work. I've seen refinished guns that would fool most experts.

Beautiful gun.
Welcome to the community and thanks for sharing photos.

Clark

Lugers like this come up for scrutiny on the Forum from time to time and almost always get comments such as "original in my opinion" and "expert restoration". I think Ed's comment about shining the flashlight at the finish is a good one. Original finish really takes on a brownish powdery hue in the yellow flashlight (not the LED hi intensity ones!). Restorers often forget to put the yellow-white coloring in the Gesichert markings, but this one is there. Also, the often mentioned small pin on top of the rear toggle should indeed be in the white and is usually blued over by the restorer. I really can't be certain from the photos if this part is white or not. And lastly, one really has to hold the piece, run your fingers over the sharp edges and look at the stampings, etc. No matter what, it is a beautiful piece that may very well be a genuine un-messed with piece that probably rested in some officer's drawer, or possibly was never issued for whatever reason. Enjoy it, we should all be so lucky as to have such a fine Luger as our first one!

Uh, oh...That sounds like one of the 'experts secrets' that George said would not be discussed... ;)

Nah, that "expert secret" is no secret.

The frames were not marked P.08 until 1941. The markings on the frame have nothing whatsoever to do with the SS. Do not shoot this gun...it is in fantastic condition and would command top dollar for this category of Luger. If you break a numbered part, you could reduce the value by half depending on what part broke. You were extremely lucky with your first Luger purchase and would be well advised to treat it conservatively. Congratulations.

FYI, the occasion that caused the P.08 to be marked P.08 was the adoption of the P.38 as the standard military sidearm.

Thus as early as 1940, some holsters were ink stamped P.08 to avoid confusion with the P.38 that was starting to be issued.

Ron is absolutely correct on the timing of the P.08 stamp on the frame. It is well documented in both Still's and the new Hallock/Van de Kant books. Think about it, the P.08 had been the standard sidearm for the German military since, as the name implies, 1908. There was no other of similar size and caliber. Thus no stamp was necessary. The introduction of the P.38 changed all that and the German military establishment wanted to avoid any confusion during the phase-in of the P.38.

John

Uh, I am sure that you just made a mistake, but there were two manufacturers of lugers in WW1, DWM and Erfurt.

Who else tooled up and made lugers? (Its in the FAQ)

DWM
Erfurt
Simson
Krieghoff
Mauser

and then the Swiss

All pre-WW2

There were no other manufacturers.

DWM made the widest amount and variations, having made military and commeriicial for many countries besides Germany.

Valentine... and in WW1 two companies made them.

There was only ONE Company that made them in WW1, the private Co. DWM.
The other manufacturer was not a Company but the German State Arsenal, Erfurt.

Jerry Burney

yes, but they were under contract, but what you say is true and I agree with it :biggulp:

Ed, Under contract to who? There was undoubtable a licence agreement between the State arsenal and DWM but that would not put Erfurt under contract to them. Erfurt was an entity unto themselves with their own inspectors and disposition of Lugers to the German Army.
A manufacturer "under contract" would be supplying Lugers to DWM. German laws concerning this complicated subject are extensive but Erfurt was not "under contract" to DWM as I see it.


Jerry Burney

Valentine..You are confusing assistance given to Erfurt by DWM with a return obligation to DWM by Erfurt. There can be no doubt that DWM assisted Erfurt with tooling setup , design blueprints and technical help with the effort to set up a Luger manufacturing line. Once this took place however there was no evident obligation on Erfurts part to supply anything to DWM. Erfurt manufactured Lugers to supply the German Army.
A contract implies you have an obligation and I suspect the only obligation Erfurt had was to pay DWM a royalty on every Luger produced so I guess you COULD say they were "under contract" to pay but not to provide Lugers to DWM.

Erfurt did certainly have their own standards and they were not as high as the private Co, DWM.

Jerry Burney

I know that "SIMSON" received a 10 yr contract, (does not mean that a contract makes for a company, but for them, they are)

For erfurt, I quote, my own book, because i don't have Gortz and Bryans with me

Quote:

In 1904 the German Navy adopted the Luger (P08), and then in 1908 the big contract; the German Army adopted the Luger, hence the designation P08. DWM was given the contract, with the stipulation that a government arsenal could also produce the pistol; Erfurt was chosen as this government arsenal. After 1910, there was a requirement for DWM to stamp the date on the top receiver of the pistol. First production of Erfurt’s is 1911, with several 1910 dated Erfurt’s claimed.

So, they are not a company, but a gov't arsenal making them for the gov't while DWM still did both gov't and commericial. There were no commericial Erfurts made.

I disagree with the comment to the effect that Erfurt did as they pleased, because Erfurt made them EXACTLY to the gov't specifications while DWM waived many requirements.


ed

Jerry,

You are certainly on the right track here and your statements about contracts, etc. are certainly true.

I think everyone has to remember that DWM held the PATENTS for the design. Initially, they were the sole producers of the guns. In 1908, long after they had become a successful enterprise in their own right, the German Government granted them a contract to build X-number of guns.

As happened here in the USA when Colt received a contract to build the 1911 for the War Department, there was a rider that stipulated that Springfield Arsenal, (A USA entity similar in respect to Erfurt) would have the right to use the patented design to build 1911s after Colt had delivered so many guns. Thus Colt was rewarded for their R&D, etc, and the government would get as little piece of their own pie if they so chose to build 1911s for their own use.

While, I am not privy to the negotiations or contracts actually signed between DWM and the German Procurement Authorities in 1907/8, I am sure there was some such similar provision.

So Erfurt ended up with a production line, and as Springfield in the USA, and Waffenfabrik Bern in Switzerland, they evolved the design and produced their own brand of gun using their own tooling and procedures and standards.. If anyone doubts this, just look at the proofing of an Erfurt versus DWM.

Sorry for the long winded reply but the subject is very complicated.

John

Absolutely no high edge wear = refinished. Why don't we ask Thor if he restored a 40 42 sn 6651 lately?

Besides Ted, I know of several guys back east that can make a luger look like new - 98%, no wear, no corner cut etc, there is always ways to tell, for one thing, seldom do you find a luger with such clean lines plus its markings crisp, etc.

It is possible, but there should still be patina and oxidation. Unless of course it is an older restore, but most of the early ones did not use proper rust or salt bluing.


Ed

Once upon a time I vowed that I would never own a gun I wasn't planning to shoot. I purchased this one with every intent to shoot it at least once.
Now, after this thread I'm too afraid of harming this gun if it is, indeed, a "survivor."