The Cartridge Counter, Awesome
 

I've been reading up on the 1902 Cartridge Counter! My own closest thus far is a 1902 Fat Barrel. They are definitly excellent! I'm been researching the this rare luger and can find only a few references. We know only Fifty were made and all with an American G.H Powel Indicating Device and were manufactured and installed by DWM in Germany. I couldn't find any reference on 'Powell' or his counter invention other than Jan' reference in Cenral Powers page 416~ I have never seen a picture of the mag itself outside of the gun. How did this American made device wind up in Germany and only one specific year and variation? Whose idea?Was there ever a patent? How many still exist? Have any surfaced lately and what is the current total? Why were only 50 made?? Gotta Luv Them and sure wish I owned one! Sounds like cross examination! What are the differences with the 1902 counter and the 1902 fat barrel other than the counter? I'm sure there a fakes~ As a side note Bob Simpson is listing a more current Mauser CC! http://www.simpsonltd.com/product_in...ducts_id=31738 ~Eric

lifer, I've never owned an original CC mag, but did make one (slotted on both sides with the indicator added to the mag follower) from a standard Mecgar mag. So probably most like the one supplied with the Mauser Parabellum CC commerative. but believe that it would also work with the original 1902 CC, should you need one in the future. TH

Eric,

The cartridge counter was a product of two factors..

1. The need of the USA Army for a larger caliber than the 7.65 mm cartridge of the 1900 tests. DWM then developed the 9mm version.

2. The marketing need of DWM to get an edge over Colt who was clearly the favorite. The Powell indicating device was thought to give them something because it was developed by an American.

Hence the development of the Model 1902 with the Powell indicating device, AKA the Cartridge Counter.

Fifty were made because that is how many Model 1900 Test guns were exchanged with DWM for 50 Model 1902s with the Powell device. One was actually tested, and there are maybe 40 or so righteous specimens floating around.

Jan Still, in Imperial Lugers, page 210 and following discusses this gun and its history.

Goertz and Sturgess dissect the problem and write extensively about this experiment on page 260 and following of the revised (new) version. It was also discussed in the older version but I no longer own the older version so I canot give you an exact reference..

BTW, here is a link to a thread you started last year that provides a lot of detail on the magazine

http://forum.lugerforum.com/showthre...unter+magazine

John

Thanks John, my post-stroke brain is not very good with memory~ Thanks for the redirect~ Great thread!! Eric

A little added note about the CC grips. As an experiment, two of the guns had their grips cannibalized and the index "window" was added to two 1911 Colt pistols. I have never heard of an account of the Colt experiment.

Ron,

Good memory. Interesting footnote.

In June, 1908, Crozier authorized that two of the Powell devices be removed from the DWM Model 1902s and fitted to two Colt Model 1907 test pistols in stock. Thus two pistols SN 197 and 200 were retrofitted with the Powell devices.

There were considerables issues with the retrofit because of the 8 cartridge capacity of the Luger and 7 cartridge capacity of the Colt. But they finally got the celluloid and silver strip modified and fitted.

At Fort Riley, the test on SN 197 was not successful; lots of jamming. SN 200 was okay until the firing pin failed.

Doesn't appear that this modification order ever went anywhere. But this was not surprising as the Cavalry was fighting the use of any sort of automatic pistol and was lobbying really hard for a larger caliber double action revolver. The Board had all the problems it could handle just getting the Model 1911 approved in vanilla form and they were still tweaking the Model 1911 as it went into production in 1912 in an effort to get it right for all constituents.

Could not find any evidence of an order for a .45 ACP version of the Powell made from scratch and tested.

But enough, I do not want to highjack Eric's thread.

John

PS: A photograph of SN197 with the Powell device may be found in Meadows, page 77.

Tk John, my thead often needs a highjacking or two!! You know your research and present it well! ~~Eric

Thank you John, and thank you for correcting 1911 to 1907 (I frequently fail in the fine details :))! I have Meadows so I will look it up.
Ron

Thank you Jan~

Lifer, Thanks for scanning the photo from Mathews, this verifies my opinion that most luger mags were made to only hold 7 rounds, although once the mag spring has weakened an eight round will fit. Unfortunately, I don't see the mag indicator in the window of the above photo. TH

Datig has/had a pic of the CC mag in his book; from the look of the grip in the color pic above, the lined mag indicator would only appear in the left half of the window...

Doesn't look like the magazine would be too hard to modify (for someone like Gerry) - Was the gripframe itself modified? Did the 'indicator' stick out past the magazine tube??? :confused:

I have a new MecGar nickeled mag that has been modified with the indicator as shown above @$150. For $$50 additional, I can add the Swiss metal insert wood bottom as shown above. TH

This might be the way to go.

https://www.gunpartscorp.com/ad/985140.htm

been there, done that....
 

It would be nice, but just like every bargain...they don't fit a standard pre WW2 luger..... more work then one can stand to make correct?.... But, nice heads up just the same.. til..lat'r...GT:)

A little off but were there official holsters that came with the counters? Like the test pieces? Eric

Tom, I think that's because the magazine has zero rounds in it...The indicator is up inside the gripframe...

No number on the strip for zero rounds... :)

A "local" gun store (temporarily local) has what they're advertising as a "Mauser 1908 Cartridge Counter." I assume this is a second generation/re-issue, like the 1970s Parabellums?

http://exclusivefirearms.com/product...ge-Counter-9mm

http://forum.lugerforum.com/album.ph...pictureid=3054

Looks like a 70's Mauser. Might just be cheap-ol-me, but $4800 seems high...

Heh...They even copied the fat barrel... :)

Rich is right. Price is high for a circa 1982 pistol.

Heres what Jones wrote in his book 'Luger Variations' in 1959

That's the 1906 Russian...The 1902 Cartridge Counter is on pg 75... :)

I'll let you post it...I'm tired...

Not a bad price considering the one at auction (I think it was Julia's), sold for $6k + commission!!

Simpson's is even cheaper, however, it's not the LE of 250, & lacks the accessories.

Unbelievable that the Mauser factory even made the same error when they made the 'M1906 Russian' Luger as a commemorative piece. I guess that the those German directors at the Mauser factory made mistakes by not doing their research as time goes by.

Albert

How to explain the cross rifle symbol on some FN 1900? Those FN 1900 are believed being Russian.

The DWM factory had a large shareholding in the FN factory, around 80%.

During the imperial era, there were two triads between England, France and Russia and the other Germany, Austria and Italy. The kaiser who had influence over his allies did not necessarily want his national arms industries to conduct business directly with Russia, instead he gave special permission to an important factory such as DWM to use their shareholding to conduct limited business with the Russians like hiding behind a screen. Commercial Lugers were sold by a few dealers in Russia, like Mauser C96 pistol being sold by English dealers such as Westley Richards and Cogswell & Harrison. English dealers also marketed these firearms to other dealers in colonial countries such as South Africa.

The national business relationships during the early imperial era was quite interesting.

Albert

In regards to the Russian maybe this might help ~~http://www.landofborchardt.com/other.html

Hi Eric, give me a break from Chuck's story on the Russian Lugers - it is wrong and a myth.

This CC attracted me for a few minutes. But I changed my mind. Still has a little bit money to spend this year, I had a standalone C96 stock acquired back a while ago, but it did not fit any of my "shooters" (I mean, collectibles, but I shoot them occasionally), need to find a gun to fit it. May the coming one fit this stocks.. hopefully.

Dan, whether he is correct doesn't affect my decision and mearly a good topic for discussion. As a prior attorney, I'm here to present the position of those who decide to address the topic whether perceived wrong or right. What points do you disagree as they can be discussed and corrected. Lugers are addicting as hundred years later there still a topic of discussion. Often times the real answer has been lost to time yet still relevent today. What other firearm draws so many opinions or renewed history. Everyone of mine has its' own history and prestige and are therefore always important which fuels my continueing addiction. Thank you for your position~~ Eric

One more point, Chuck Whitacker, I believe thats his name deserves praise and a heartfelt thanks. Where else can one find a plethora of almost every type of luger, great photographs, historic perspective and so much more. I think he manages to address the numerous topics so well! What more its FREE! He is not trying a book or royalties! We all owe him a hug! Eric

Hi Eric,

You are welcome to hug and kiss Chuck Whittacker by believing some of the false information that he writes on his web site. CW is not doing a good service to the Luger society in my opinion and he has tried to suck up to important experts like Charles Kenyon to receive acceptance of a few Lugers in his collection which are suspicious. He is a coward who wants to show off his collection/archive from behind a wall because he has an inferior complex. We wants to try and 'razzle and dazzle' collectors with attractive images and misleading graphical information so one day he can screw a few people. Let's see how far he will get with his M1904 Navy made from various parts which looks like it was never handled in over 100 years, and his M1900 Russian Luger which is a total fake. When that day happens, maybe you will defend him as his attorney. In the mean time polish up on your Russian and Bulgarian :)

Enjoy,
Albert

Hi Albert, His whole article can't be wrong! Is there anything to you can agree on so we can agree on??

Albert -- This is leading to a more interesting direction. Regarding landofborchart's M1904 Navy parts gun, could you open a topic with picture and text illustration to show the detail? Not collecting Lugers, but that must be very useful not only to Luger collectors, but also to the whole C&R community..

Eric,

I did not say the whole (Russian) article or his web site were wrong, instead I was meaning that his source(s) of information are wrong and the way he puts together a story. A serious collector cannot only use 'millimeters, degrees and graphic illustrations (i.e. chamber markings and images from literature)' to reach conclusions about certain Lugers. Most of the information on his web site is based on technical measurements, some random photos, a few letters and obsolete data. He hardly - if any - mentions the highest standards of workmanship at the DWM factory or any thing about German heritage.

When I study a subject, whether it is products from DWM, Mauser or Walther factory, I consider more important factors such as what influenced changes from the international markets and the politics behind it - where CW is often lacking. I also have an enormous archive from where I can also obtain my research and knowledge. Furthermore, I make a big effort to even visit collectors in other foreign countries to personally listen to their input and examine their collector items when CW has probably never traveled outside of the US. His method of 'education' is quite lame and narrow-minded.

Albert

Hello Alvin,

It is not necessary to open a new topic about LOB's M1904 Navy Luger, but some time ago he managed to find (or construct) a breech block with the smaller extractor years for his this Navy Luger. As the barrel between a M1904 and M1906 Navy is different (the M1904 has a 'bull' (not tapered) barrel), it is possible that the barrel on that M1904 Navy was also manufactured. It could be easily determined by looking for a 'gas ring' inside the chamber area which is very, very difficult to create. Since he did not want to show me this Navy Luger when I visited him in 2002 when we were friendly, I presume that the barrel is a reproduction to satisfy his desire. Last but not least, this Navy looks brand new and the finish is definitely not genuine. He has never posted images on his web site showing this Navy Luger dismantled. The work on this M1904 Navy Luger is good, but it is NOT factory genuine like he tries to make out with other Lugers depicted on his web site.

Now, you decide what game he is trying to play. You are probably aware that I am an expert on various Mauser pistols, and as a comparison, CW's knowledge on Lugers does not even come close to mine. He could learn a few things from me :rockon:

Albert

This thread is like a luger court of law. Each witness comes to court/forum along with their respective opinion. Some jurors agree and others don't! They are instructed that they may accept, reject of mearly dismiss the opinions offered. In the end the jury must make their decision by the greater weight of the facts presented. As in human nature there is always different opinions as to the facts and evidence admitted. The standard is the greater weight of evidence. Opinions may be admitted only through 'expert witnesses' who then are examined based on the facts presented. Jurors can either agree with the whitness, disagree or reject outright! Here we are presented with Chuck Whittakers opinions. Some of us juriors will agree and others may disagree with the opinions tendered. Here in luger court much is the same! Whittaker has presented his opinion and conclusions based upon those facts as he perceives them! The witness veracity, first hand knowlege, monetary gain or hidden motives are examined. After years in a court room I've been taught sometimes in a hard way not to jump to conclusions until all the credible evidence is heard. The Latins have a saying, 'Res Ipsa Loquitor' ~The facts speak for themselves~ The luger story is rewritten amended and corrected almost daily and a part of our lives. This due especially to computer on-line research. This is the reason its so special
and fun! Each of us jurors share in its' history albeit changing and evolving and thats why we are so proud and sometimes corrected! Yes we all count~ Respecially Submitted~~~ Eric, Esq

Albert I just read your brilliant posts! Great facts, history and conclusions."Great Work" Your input is greatly appreciated! We will save you some turkey and cranberry sauce~~ Eric

Thank you Eric. However, the limitation of the 'Luger Court' that exists today is biased allowing for the the manipulation of the facts as well as the reliance of incorrect information in order to satisfies a collectors motive.

Thanks for the turkey since I became 80% vegan, but turkeys and all other living animals have the same equal right to live like us human beings. Sadly, this freedom of life is not respected in most 'human courts' since many, many people on this planet accept the slaughter of over 100 BILLION animals per year for our consumption which actually shortens our lifespan. So, give the turkey a break.

Bon appetite,
Albert

Albert, I do!! We were assured our turkey commited suicide and therefor we were only picking up nature pieces but in fact performing a small service to mankind! Thats my story and I'm sticking to it! It helps me sleep at night although not much prevents me anymore~~ Tks, Me!