I had a crazy idea, Looking for some input...
 

I was thinking about my shooter Luger and where it sits on its useful life. The laws of supply and demand have been working on Lugers and on Luger parts. Many shooter pistols are tired and many of the really great Lugers a person would be crazy to shoot.

I started thinking about the gun kit culture that has sprung up in the last 10 years or so. Someone will buy an 80% to 100% receiver or frame and buy parts kits to build their own custom gun. It is very popular in the 1911 and Ar-15 crowds. With the advent of the internet, and computer aided machining it is possible for companies to do small runs of part kits and frames at prices that would be impossible in the past.

One of the reasons that there are 1911 and Ar-15 kits and no kits for niche type guns is all based on market size and the cost and supply of parts. A small company can't invest its capital on a product with a high level of risk.

Now here is the crazy idea... There are sites like Kickstarter.com that allow small businesses to collect sales from regular people and if the break even point is met, they will produce and ship the item to everyone that paid in advance. if the break even point is not met, every customer is refunded the sale. It eliminates all production risk for a product line.
Now lets say someone created a kickstarter with the goal of making high fidelity luger kits (where all parts would be interchangeable to an authentic production luger in function and quality). For the sake of example, lets say the break even point is 500 commitments at $250 for a supplier to produce 100% frames and 750 commitments at $600 to get the other 43 odd parts produced and bundled together. You make the frame the serialized part and ship it directly from the manufacturer to each person's FFL to avoid any issues with the ATF. The world would now have 500 brand new noncollectable Lugers at $850 a pop for shooting and enjoying as well as a bunch of new, hard to find parts to keep all the real guns running.
So is this the most crackpot idea ever or is there anybody else that thinks this would be a good thing? I've got thick skin.

Are your dollar figures based on actual estimates from a manufacturer? If not, a reality check is in order.

Guaranteeing plug-and-play will be an issue.

The Luger is a very niche market. Mauser/Interarms and the various incarnations of Orimar didn't manage to crack it in any serious way, Norinco built prototypes but decided against production. I don't mean to be negative, but you are swimming against a strong tide.

You might get serious traction if you make this in cal. .45acp.

--Dwight

it might be possible with the newer CNC machines, however lets look at what we know and then rumours.

1. Mauser made new made lugers in the 1970's, and they sold only okay, plus you can still get them new in box for around $1000-$1400

2. Mitchel arms (and other names) made them for years in stainless and they have always had issues with mechanically having problems

3. Rumours - I have heard rumours of 45 lugers being made at least twice in the last 10 years using CNC, one failed, the other one is still trying.

4. I know a guy who makes parts, they look very good, but think that the amount would be about double what you state or more.

Are your dollar figures based on actual estimates from a manufacturer? If not, a reality check is in order.

Ignoring stocking availability, the cost to purchase every part of a Luger at today's individual retail price would be $966.60 for all parts except the frame. Lugerman's only Frame is $350.

https://www.gunpartscorp.com/Manufac...093.htm?page=1

http://www.lugerman.com/Pages/MainPages/Parts.html

http://www.e-sarcoinc.com/lugerp08.aspx?page=2

Individual retail is always more expensive then package wholesale. usually by a large multiplier. especially in a market where there is no package wholesale.

Here are some examples of 1911 parts kits containing the same types of parts and quantities as required. Many of these kits are from real small time manufacturers
http://www.e-sarcoinc.com/partskits.aspx
http://www.uspatriotarmory.com/1911-...arts_c_79.html
http://aresarmor.com/store/Category/1911

100% Frames
http://www.brownells.com/items/1911-frame-kit.aspx
http://www.1911store.com/sti-1911-fr...tandard-3.aspx
http://www.shootersconnectionstore.c...pian-C490.aspx

Guaranteeing plug-and-play will be an issue.
1911 kits are usually not plug and play either, the good ones however only need a dremel and some other basic tools to smooth out problems. Stuff that can be done on a standard gun hobbist's kitchen table. I think a lot of problems can be solved by using a high quality numbers matching gun as the template for measurement.

The Luger is a very niche market. Mauser/Interarms and the various incarnations of Orimar didn't manage to crack it in any serious way, Norinco built prototypes but decided against production. I don't mean to be negative, but you are swimming against a strong tide. They were trying to make a profit selling a completed collector gun on the retail market with associated overhead, marketing, and liability while trying to keep the cost lower than the real gun 20 years ago. I'm talking about selling a wholesale parts kit, with no advertising or overhead.

You might get serious traction if you make this in cal. .45acp.
There are so few .45 acp versions that I feel there would be way more problems. the idea is to make good shooters to help out the hobby.

Thanks for the input. Negativity is a good thing, that's how I can find out if this is a good or bad idea.

1. Mauser made new made lugers in the 1970's, and they sold only okay, plus you can still get them new in box for around $1000-$1400 My understanding was that you could still get real surplus Lugers very cheap in the 1970s. valid point however, most people have to do a fair amount of digging to find one and by that time they already discounted buying a luger or bought something else. (i wanted one and couldn't find one for sale at a reasonable price)

2. Mitchel arms (and other names) made them for years in stainless and they have always had issues with mechanically having problems. my understanding (and I could be wrong) is that their build quality was pretty junky for what they cost.

3. Rumours - I have heard rumours of 45 lugers being made at least twice in the last 10 years using CNC, one failed, the other one is still trying.
I had heard he was hand making them for crazy money. I wouldn't even attempt it. it seems like a whole other level of discussion.

4. I know a guy who makes parts, they look very good, but think that the amount would be about double what you state or more. That's valid. This all comes down to economy of scale
__________________

Mundy, An experienced West Coast dealer/restorer had originally proposed making 1000 M1907 Cal ,45 lugers @$1,500 each, but found that the demand would not be more than 100, so the price is now $15,000 each. This may be an indication of the demand and cost involved. Even when John Martz was modifing existing PO8 parts into great functioning .45 lugers, the cost was $5,000 each. I doubt that we'll see any interchangable parts kits at a reasonable price in my life time. TH

I bought a reblued 1918 Erfurt shooter for $650.
Mechanically excellent and tight. Shoots great.
You would have to beat that price point for a non-collectable shooter P08 IMHO

I'll chime in on this one, because I find the idea intriguing.

The big obstacle is numbering of all the parts of the pistol. Manufacturers numbered them in the past for one reason only (and it's not to have "all matching" pistols!). They numbered them in order to be able to assemble the pistol with the parts that "belong" to the particular unit after the bluing. Which tells us that a certain level of intolerance was machined into the parts, and MOST small parts had to be individually hand fitted to the EXACT unit.

This means that there are no two completely alike out there (down to microns)! Some of the members here are accomplished gunsmiths, and they will attest to the need of hand fitting the replacement parts to the weapons they work on. On another hand......MOST Parabellum owners/collectors ARE NOT knowledgeable and/or equipped for gunsmithing.

So which weapon would a "starter company" use for the template to replicate the parts on CNC machine (which is VERY possible)? And how would the end user fit their replacement parts to the weapon needing the new parts? Taking it all to the gunsmith, and have it "hand fitted"? This alone would push the final cost well beyond the price of the "non matching shooter" available today pretty much anywhere (there are thousands of them in circulation). Spare parts are still available in abundance (and they also need to be "hand fitted"!).

To replicate the same weapon over and over on CNC is quite possible, but the quality of such produced unit would be no better than what Interarms attempted in the past (possibly worse), and would have VERY limited market (IMO). "Parts kits" that would be offered for repair of genuine pistols would all have to be fitted (some extensively) to each individual, vintage pistol.

So far, these pistols survived in such quantity thanks largely to unselfish, altruistic collectors, which see themselves as "guardians/caretakers" of the historical pieces that are merely preserving them for the next generation. These people somehow established the "matching numbers value", and "non matching value" to fit certain pistols. As we all know, there are very few pistols out there that have matching magazines, holsters, etc. Non matching magazines are OK, but god forbid one internal part is "mismatched"!! I think it's hypocritical.

There are other, selfish bastards (like myself) that have "matching" pistols, and shoot them (not extensively mind you!), with complete awareness that some original (numbered) part might break, and make them "worth less" in the future. Worth less to who, I ask? Descendants that will sell it at the first opportunity, and take a vacation to Bahamas? Personally,..... I couldn't care less!

There are more selfish bastards like me out there, and the number of "matching" pistols will inevitably get smaller and smaller, in the next century, until there will be only "shooter grade" weapons circulating in the world. Does it matter? In my experience, there might be a handful of young people out there that are even remotely interested in WW2, or history in general.

Even non matching ones are shooting good, they are marvels of the technology from the late 19th century, and good to look at. Newly produced "shooter" will never have the attractiveness of the historical piece ("been there, done that"), "matching", or "not", for someone interested in history.

In summary......I don't see this idea as a viable, profit generating idea, but if one has tons of surplus money/time, it would be fun (in a way of saying "look guys, I did this!!"). All I see is deadlines, expenses, contracts, bills, customer service, employees/payroll, workman's comp, insurance, ATF, EPA, IRS.........everything I ran away from, and the time is running short!

Sorry about the rant. I don't post much, but boy.......when I do I write novels!:thumbsup:

Thanks for all the replies so far! P08Leder and Lugerdoc defintely have a point. The price point has to be low enough to beat out buying an authentic shooter, something very hard to do (maybe impossible) without a total sacrifice of quality. It would be interesting to get numbers from a manufacture. I think you are right that a person would have to get the whole collection of parts together for less than $650 to make it worth it. Its entirely a moot point however if danielsand's concerns cannot be addressed.

Danielsand,
I do not know what the production floor of the companies that made Lugers to a high quality of fit and function looked like. I also do not know how many of the production steps were accomplished by unskilled laborers and could be replaced by a combination of C&C machining, the workshop of a 21st century enthusiast and youtube and which production steps would require a trip to a gunsmith. I have an idea, but I cannot answer to 100% confidence. Many of the 1911kits that are on the market today do require a level of finishing unique to each firearm. I am more than happy to find an answer and if anyone can point me in the right direction I would be grateful. I currently have the surplus of time to find exactly where the idea falls apart.

[QUOTE=mundy928; unskilled laborers and could be replaced by a combination of C&C machining, .[/QUOTE]

It's just an opinion,....my opinion,.......but make no mistake about the quality of the steel (almost impossible to replicate today), and the level of skill those people had. "Unskilled laborers" were probably doing bluing, assembly, polishing, etc and certain level of skill was needed even in those areas. The people that actually fitted the individual parts had skills, as machinists and/or gunsmiths. Final finishing was crappy (final machining), and we know why (cutting man hours). This level of external (and to some extent, internal) metal finishing would not "fly" in today's market.

The steps in the production of (e.g.) DMW Parabellum, are documented (if you do the search), and the man hours only, would price the produced weapon WAY out of today's market. In order to "cut costs", one would have to resort to investment casting, and such, and this would not be the level of quality/durability one expects from a vintage pistol that was made "the old school" way.

If one wants to produce "replica" of the vintage weapon,....by all means, it's possible, but to generate enough interest (and market) to be profitable, ...........IMO, not doable.

High production cost is the MAIN reason why German armed forces switched to P38 (which didn't offer any advantages over P08, except lower production cost, and the awful DA is debatable!). Factories that were producing P08 at that time, were "government owned", and/or subsidized by the government. As such, they were able to offer P08 at MUCH lower cost, than the amount of labor that went into them would demand.

Producing P08 of a lower quality, and with no historical connection would be exercise in futility,........but that's just MY opinion, and worth exactly what you paid for it! :surr:

I think comparing 1911 to Luger parts is a huge mistake - huge. And not being negative, you asked our opinion and this is mine. There are scores of folks who make exact replicas of 1911A1's - besides Colts making them for so many years.

And numbering of lugers - this was a gov't requirement - see the requirements to DWM and Erfurt - although I believe that hand fitting was required, I know that the numbering was a requirement and not strictly for hand fitting...

It was required by the government, no doubt. But why?

Because it somewhat simplified the repairs that needed to be done by "field armorers" , and the parts were not "interchangeable" in the sense we refer to it today.

To reproduce the EXACT replica of the P08 today, would cost in excess of 2K per unit (and the steel would still not be the same!). And when one adds a decent profit margin to that........(3-4K to the market!), who would buy it? One can have PRISTINE, historical piece (with all the provenance!) for that kind of dough.

There IS a reason why no manufacturer (and I'm talking about companies that already have the tooling, knowhow, and the manpower) offers it today.

Going from "ground up" into that "business venture" (and here I assume it would be for business/profit?) would simply be cost prohibitive. For fun? Hobby? Bragging rights? Sure,.......ANYTHING is possible if time and or money is of no object.

While I agree with all the cautions from various posters, I have to confess I've thought about this too.

The economic argument is to me the most compelling obstacle. I.e., a new production pistol that looks just like an original Parabellum and functions to the same level would cost significantly more than the $700-$1,300 that can buy a good original shooter nowadays. I am assuming small runs and best available computer assisted manufacturing.

However the equation is changing as computer-assisted small run manufacturing keeps getting better and cheaper. And the original Luger inventory ages. I simply don't see either trend changing.

I would love a new manufactured Artillery, Navy, Model 1900 and similar at a price under $1,000 as shooters. Question is how long until computer-assisted techniques enable a high-quality reproduction at that price. My guess is 5-10 years. As the OP suggests, I think it will likely be collectors banding together to avoid overhead and marketing.

Odin did make a M1900 look-a-like several years ago @$1500, but look at the results. They gave it a good try with their stainless PO8, but no where near the quality of a used original shooter. Perhaps someday when 3D casting technology has progress to Star Trek quality and shooters are selling for $2,000 each, it may be practiable. TH

Several posts point out how Mauser, Aimco et al tried this unsuccessfully. True, but IMO there is useful learning from those efforts: there is probably at least a small market if quality and price can be successfully addressed.

The price for a Luger can be as low as $360, a mixed 1911 went for that on GB on 6 September. And parts can be accumulated for $400-600 or less. You can't beat this with a newly produced gun, unless... You are producing high end Lugers, like carbines or naval/artillery Lugers with a stock. They seem to be VERY expensive and so a copy, as some gunsmiths will convert yours, would sell for a profit. And while 80% lowers sell for AR-14s, because of SOOOO many parts available, the same is not be true for a P-08.
http://www.gunbroker.com/Auction/Vie...Item=504476158

Why should one buy a Luger made with parts and without any "historical significance" while you can get a "real" good shooter for such a little money?
IMHO

Because sub-$900 shooters require significant effort/patience to find, and (in my admittedly limited experience) generally have various issues with respect to bore and appearance.

A new production unit would presumably be cosmetically perfect, and some like that.

For example, my favorite shooter is a M1900 with significant appearance issues. I paid $1,150 for it, and based on my enjoyment of that pistol I would consider buying an excellent M1900 reproduction in the $1,200 to say $1,800 range. I don't think I'm alone, but I also don't think it's a big market. The technology is not there yet to produce an accurate M1900 in my acceptable price range, but the cost trend is encouraging.

I've had the M1900 extractors, ejectors & grip safety springs reproduced, since they are the most broken items and do also have most other original parts (except slides & frames) in stock, with little demand and high cost to acquire. I doubt that there is much demand for M1900 shooters, due to the fragile recoil springs and unnessary toggle lock system. There were reasons that DWM redesigned the luger in 1906. TH

Aside from the technical issues associated with manufacturing, and the cost-point that a potential run of reproductions would have to sell for, I seriously question whether there would be a viable market for "new" Lugers. There are relatively few gun buyers who even know what a Luger is, much less want one.

I agree there is not a viable market as that term is generally understood, but I think Mundy928 is actually addressing that fact as he describes his idea in post #1.

Given the advances in 3D printing alone that we have recently seen, coupled with continued improvements in CNC processes, design software and so on, I would almost bet that in a few years some sort of a co-op of interested Luger enthusiasts can form and get some pistols made. I've been involved in a variety of mechanical hobbies over the years and it's often amazing what talented people can create when they do it for enthusiasm for the subject, and not just for money. However IMO the technology is just not there yet to do it at an attractive price.

If it is ever done, it will be a labor of love
Because you will never make enough to be compensated for that labor

I have toured the Taurus facilities here in Miami and they use an metal injection mold process for many of their smaller parts. They then only require minor machining to arrive at spec.

I wonder if this process would make a modern Luger production cheaper?

I do agree that at some point manufacturing abilities will cross the demand curve and the potential for new parts/assemblies may well become a reality. After all, they're making new '68 Mustang bodies. . .

I would find a new Luger most interesting if the price was not prohibitive. I am a shooter, not a collector or dealer. To have a newly made Luger with modern steels and tight tolerances, would be most enticing to me. I own Mauser Parabellums, and shoot them, but one can never have too many, and perhaps different calibers would make them even more interesting.

The Luger is a fairly complicated gun to make, much more so than a 1911. CNC would definitely make it easier, but the accuracy in the CNC process is easily lost when you have to use as many setups as you would need when milling out, for example, a Luger frame. I'm afraid there would be a need for skilled hand fitting even when using modern day technology. I have actually shown the drawings to the owner of a CNC shop, hoping that they could at least make some parts, but it was just not economically possible even at 500 to 1000 units.

I love the idea though, it just needs to be applied to something more obscure and profitable. For example, I'd be more than happy to pay $2k for a Borchardt kit, even if I have to do all the hand fitting and finish work myself. It's no more complicated to make than a Luger, and interchangeability won't be much of an issue as nobody would swap parts between original pistols and replicas. I don't know how big the market would be for kits, but I'd say that a whole lot of collectors would love to buy a finished copy of this "holy grail". You have to cough up at least $30-40k or so for the original, so I'm thinking that a good replica could very well sell for $3k.

Add 9mm and .22 conversion kits, and you'll have one hell of a cool shooter. :rockon:

Definitely. Machining is really not a big deal, I thing the major hurdle is to get to the point where you're actually machining. There is a lot of work to do before you can put a chunk of steel in the CNC mill, it would probably take a week or so just to draw the frame correctly in 3D CAD. Add the rest of the parts, and you're probably looking at a couple of months of drawing only. With that done, you then have to start looking at the machine code, figure out the tools you need to use, optimize tool paths, setups etc. I don't have a clue how many man hours you'd have in it once everything is said and done, but I can safely say that it would take some very stubborn and dedicated people to tackle all this. I'm not saying that it can't be done, but you're more than likely looking at time you won't get paid for.

Don't get me wrong, CNC is great in many ways, but it loses a lot of its advantages if you use it for short runs. Sometimes it's actually quicker and easier to do things on a hand cranked mill.

I've done some reading and think I have some information to help solve a few of the unanswered questions thus far. Feel free to add to what I have to say or tear it apart.
http://www.forgottenweapons.com/wp-c...unFacts%29.pdf
This is a pretty good article written by a reporter that toured the Mauser production floor when they started making Lugers again in the sixties. Some of the highlights; Mauser sold their Lugers to Interarms for around $80 completed which works out to between $520 and $550 in today's consumer adjusted price index. Interarms sold them retail for between 2 and 2 1/2 times that number. (we all know after the fact that Mauser lost money on the deal). they were also scaled to quite impressive production numbers.
Mauser updated the production machining to 1960s level technology and eliminated the vast majority of hand fitting. The majority of hand fitting on the original guns came from the inability to manufacture parts to the tolerances required using turn of the 20th century machining.
The frame seems to be the biggest machining problem. It requires an obscene amount of cuts.

The Mitchell era Lugers were reverse engineered. They measured Lugers and built their own off what they came up with (with significant changes). They also did not have access to any of the original production metallurgy. It seems that the largest complaints were metallurgy and build quality issues.
I've tracked down a translated materials table, we have better metals today, the key is getting the right type of metal (malleability vs hardness and whatnot) in the right spots.
https://www.scribd.com/doc/153629976...structions-pdf

I'm also attaching the original DWM production blueprints. There are better quality ones floating around, but these work as an example. Like Ollie said, building it in solidworks would be a major pain. If you were a company paying someone to do it, I think that is where you would go broke in today's economy.

The production blueprints exceed the allowable attachment size for the forum. If you want to check them out, I pulled most of them from this gunsmith forum page.
http://www.weaponeer.net/forum/forum...2&PN=1&TPN=1//

And Olle, just for kicks, here is your original Borchardt Owners manual.
https://www.scribd.com/doc/175718570...stem-Borchardt

3D printing, which IMO is a promising path to a precise Luger replica in the foreseeable future, continues to advance. GE is planning to make an aircraft engine with 3D.

http://www.3ders.org/articles/201607...ine-by-ge.html

The links at the bottom of the above story also are interesting; for example, classic car parts now being made via 3D assist. They use 3D to make the molds for the castings, machining on the metal casting is still required. The central problem remains: a Luger replica would be a relatively short run, so unless a lot of the 3D and machining set-up labor is donated, Luger replicas - while clearly possible - would be expensive.

I had one of the Mitchell lugers a few years back, and it was nowhere near the quality of the original. I traded it off and was happy to be rid of it. Just holding and comparing an original Luger to any new gun makes me wonder in awe how they made them so well. Don't get me wrong, I like a lot of the new guns out there but they don't make them like they used to!

What about converting .30 Lugers to 9mm? I would imagine that there are a lot of unloved Lugers in 30 sitting in the backs of safes all over the gun-world yearning to brought out and shot. Maybe rebore, rebarrel, or make a cannon-kit in 9mm? Just a thought.

There are pretty of 9mm barrels available for a pretty simple barrel change(if you have the tools). Change the barrel and the mainspring and there you go- Bob's your uncle.;)

A complete set of digital P.08 Luger blueprints is available from me. I have been selling them for years, and never had a customer ask for their money back. I spent upwards of 200 hours cleaning up the scans and making them exceptionally readable. (see the sticky post in the For Sale forum)

If you are interested, PM me. The cost is $25.00 and they are delivered by download. The data is 440MB in a zip file...

I have a friend who is a VP of a manufacturing firm in China that does extensive work with machine tools and had a chance to discuss this idea with him. He was home for the holidays. He is pretty knowledgable about costs for finely machined parts. We disassembled a Luger and removed a breech block from the toggle train on a '38 Mauser, and stripped everything off the breech block so he could see the part clearly. Theory was the breechblock is one of the more challenging parts.

He was pretty impressed by the machining. Due to all the angles and cuts etc. his assessment was that while CNC, 3D printing etc. might speed the process up and make it cheaper today than say a few years ago, manufacturing a Luger replica would be a challenging and expensive undertaking. The parts are complex enough that you'd still need to cast the parts. Many would require several CNC setups. Due to the complexity of the setups, and the number of operations required to machine the various parts, he felt the setup cost would be prohibitive at low volumes. Essentially he validated the opinions of several in this thread that we are not there yet in terms of short run manufacturing for such complex/hard parts.

I would love for someone to prove him wrong. But am not expecting that for at least a few years.

I would say the breech block is one of the simpler pieces.
The tricky and involved piece is the Frame!

A Great Discussion!!! Thank You All!

"VP of a manufacturing firm in China that does extensive work with machine tools"

If anyone could see a profit in it, it would be China with lower labor cost. But I suspect that devoting aspects of such a manufacturer to this project would tend to be very unlikely considering other more marketable projects for global sales. Very few countries would be willing to import such a pistol with the buyers in each even smaller.

Now Pakistan with 'Khyber Pass Arms' would be willing and sale in the U.S. via relatives. But they would never be allowed thru customs. They are doing good with quality knife sales and damascus steel and are good machinist.

Don absolutely he agreed on the frame. In fact he started laughing when we examined the frame - "they don't make 'em like that anymore" for a reason - too costly!! The undercut where the grip panel tops insert into the frame sort of blew his mind.:eek:

This was the first time I have ever even partially disassembled the toggle, and the first time I have inspected a breech block with all parts removed. We inspected that part because it is easier to strip all parts from it, rather than the frame or the entire toggle for example. To my eye it seemed even more complex than I had imagined perviously. I'm not a machinist but I am woodworker and even doing one in wood would tax my skills to the limit.