41 Banner Mauser Luger What Variation Please?
 

Hello Gentlemen,
Just got this. Nice looking Banner Mauser. Only proof on it is an Eagle/623. Serial # on frame, and slide. So, commercial I guess? This Luger shows no signs of a refinish,( my humble opinion, 50 years+ of collecting). I value the opinions of this forum.
Thanks in advance for any replies.

welcome to the forum

some clear, close ups of the markings on the outside would be good. the stamps on the inside are worker markings, so not consistent enough to tell (yet, maybe someone will do a study on them)

since its dated, it went to the army... commercial would not be dated IMO

Thanks.

I'm looking at the frame. There is no Mauser hump. The inside of the frame is in the white. I saw a '36 with no hump in another thread, and the connected conjecture was that left over DWM parts were around, then, and some of that vintage had the DWM frames with no hump. But did this situation present itself in 1941?

I don't have a clue.
Thank you for your reply.

Great username!... :D :thumbup:

That sucker needs a good cleaning. :)

Please also let us know which parts are numbered. Curious that the Mauser toggle link is not.

no numbers on anything.

should be in the commercial fashion - numbers on bottom of sideplate, bottom of take down lever

?

Except for #'s on frame, slide, and grips, it's sterile .

I forgot to welcome you to the forum, Dennis...

My question was more aimed at the community than you...we are all somewhat armchair detectives, ferreting out the clues that will lead to an assessment of your pistol. I'm still learning, and developed the query after studying the pics. Someone will know the answer--whether this pistol was assembled with an old DWM frame. This business about lack of serial numbers is also anomalous, and may go right along with the notion that the pistol was assembled from left over parts--by whom or when would be other questions, if this turns out to be true.

David, no correct commercial markings, no military except the 41, no witness markings - I would say its a put together gun

but don't let that be the last word... I know pre-WW2 stuff much better

Ed

Gentlemen,
Thank you all for the replies. I am not trying
to make a "Holy Grail" out of this Luger. Just trying to ascertain if it's a $1000.00 Luger or a $1500.00 one. It's not a refinished gun, edges are sharp, does show no signs of ever having been fired. But, has the slightest holster wear on the high spots. I was thinking a left over parts put together later in the war. But why the extra effort with the fit and finish? Anyway, this is what makes collecting so fascinating for me.

David

I like your definition:

"we are all somewhat armchair detectives, ferreting out the clues that will lead to an assessment of your pistol..."

it's quite amusing I think


:thumbup:

Grazie !

The problem is that there is no category for this gun, and it is worth whatever someone is willing to pay. Does the lack of standardized numbers make it odd? Yes. Worth more? Dunno.
Seems to me like there should be a premium for a gun with unusual numbering, but the problem is to find someone willing, and who has real money, to pay more.
I'd like to see lots of good clear photos to try to make sense of it.
An interesting gun, to be sure.
dju

I looks to be in the white internally....does that make sense? (Sorry, just saw Ithaca brought up the same issue).....still, some parts look a little "soft", as in some polishing before a refinish.....look at the bevels on the middle toggle piece.

more photos
 

If nothing else, I need to take a class in digital photography.

Since you have it in hand, are there ANY signs that numbers have been removed, be it gouges, faint partial numbers, slight contours where the numbers were removed? Particularly under the barrel just ahead of the receiver? I just can't tell from the photos.
Also, therre is the issue of a Mauser "hump" on the back of the barrel extension. Some photos suggest that it is there, others do not.
Any cursive letter (suffix) below the numbers on the front of the lower? Perhaps a "books guy" can help us there.
Any proofs or markings on the barrel, and what markings am I seeing on the right side just behind the barrel?
Personally I'm seeing no evidence of numbers removal and re-blue. So that leaves us at being assembled from parts.
dju

Maybe a good close-up of the left side just behind the barrel where the numbers are supposed to be?
dju

Decent enough quality pics here, Dennis!

more pictures
 

No signs of any proofs or numbers being removed. No dipped in, dished out places on the metal. Barrel is proofed "E/623", never serial numbered. Don't have a clue what a "hump" is. ( I do, but I think it does not apply in this situation) No suffix. Reading in the big red bible, it's a variation #10. Put together from parts late in the war. So, that being taken into account would explain it. Ifs it is an attempt to make a Banner Luger, why make a $2000. one, when they could have made it into a $5000. one? Anyway, I,m getting the hang of taking better pictures.

Well I've never seen the serial number placed on the right side of the receiver AND in such an unprofessional manner.
But I'm stumped here. It does appear to have been built but never numbered.
I'd really like to hear from some others as to their thoughts and speculations.
The pictures are getting better. Take some more like the last one, close-ups, of different parts on the gun.
dju

The barrel was made by Steyr.

Steve:
Care to elaborate a bit?
How can you tell the mfg. of the barrel, and more importantly, when was Steyr making Luger barrels; pre-war, war-time, or post war? Were they a common supplier?
This may help us in establishing a lineage on the gun. Maybe.
Thanks.
dju

Steyr used the E/623 acceptance stamp. These barrels were used as armourer replacements during WW2. I suppose there were probably quite a few manufactured. You also find Radom's with this acceptance stamp as well.

I think the subject Luger is a parts gun. Of course that's only my opinion.