Nice K-Date photos...
 

Nice K-date photos on a web-site...

http://www.lmd-militaria.com/page41.html

Regards,

Pete... <img src="graemlins/yltype.gif" border="0" alt="[typing]" />

Interesting numbering system. Amazing there is only one surviving Luger in this range. <img src="graemlins/yltype.gif" border="0" alt="[typing]" />

That's neat, but all of the books I've seen say 1 - 10000.

Drool.

Jimbo, Please check your private posts.

The 1 is not lined up with the 0's. I would be highly suspect !! Of the millions and millions of Lugers and P38's made why is this the only luger with a 5 digit number?? (Let's remember a-z WWI and WWII...) P'38's are no exception to this rule and the P38 on his site has the last 0 off line with the stamping machine. Some think, on P38's that the stamping machine reverted to 0000 after 9999, if the person using the machine missed it, they would destroy the frame or perhaps add a 1 to keep the frame?? It could also be an outright fake with someone stamping an extra O. The web site has one photo of the serial number which is not enough to judge. If you look at the P38 with the serial number on the slide and frame you can clearly see the extra 0 added. Only my opinion.... Also, a dang shame if someone added any extra numbers to a K date. Again my opinion but the gun looks refinished.

So I am ready for the jury to convict me..........

Mark

P.S. Check my web site http://www.p38guns.com , under construction... and yes, I also have a bunch of Lugers.

In the October issue of The Gun Report Charles Kenyon has the second part of an article entitled "Luger Rarities of the 1920's". In the article he mentions the military serial procedure which was to number the pistols with one to four digits up through 9999 and then reverting back to 1 and adding an alpha suffix. Apparently he subscribes to the school of thought that only four digits were normally used.

I am a bit confused...(usual state of affairs...) :

In Charlie Kenyon's book, Lugers At Random, on page 35; there is shown a nice 1937 Mauser S/42 code, serialled 10000 g. But I know the photos were taken back in 1968-69...

Who is corect, here, as to numbers including or not including the number "10000" ?

Regards,

Pete... <img src="graemlins/yltype.gif" border="0" alt="[typing]" />

Pete, I knew I saw a photo of a Mauser with SN 10000 and looked for over an hour last night for it. I'm not losing my mind afterall.

Thanks for finding it. Pete, you da' man!

In the same article Kenyon also has changed his mind about the 1920 Commercial and 1923 Commercial designation even though this is mentioned repeatedly in his book L@R. He explains that DWM picked up at approximately serial number 76100 for the commercial Lugers manufactured late in 1918 and had reached serial number 96000 by mid 1920. Apparently DWM received a military contract for Lugers which were chamber dated 1920 and 1921 and were serial numbered in the military fashion of ns, a, and b letter suffix.
He then puts forth the theory that DWM jumped to the letter suffix i on the commercial pistols as the letter i is the 9th letter of the alphabet and the commercial range was in the 90,000 range, and DWM did not want to use a six digit serial number due to limited space on the frame. This had been discussed by collectors for years, but was finally put in print when Jan Still brought out his Weimar Luger book.
The 1920 and 1923 Commercial designation has been used so long that it has become the only way that we recognize the 5 digit commercials and the 4 digit with alpha suffix serial number. Dealers continue to use it for this reason, just as the "Double Date" has become a part of our description of Reichswehr property marked Lugers.

That is interesting Johnny, another indication that books are not always right!

Many authors later disprove theories they had or have believed.

Thanks for the info!

Thanks Johnny for the interesing insight and update.

Jimbo

Hello Johnny,

Please check your Private Message box...I would love to get a copy of this Gun Report article, if not too much trouble...

I will even offer a steak dinner in the deal, the first time we might meet in person some day.

You can ask Ron Wood about this...we had great steaks in Tulsa last weekend...

Regards,

Pete... <img src="graemlins/yltype.gif" border="0" alt="[typing]" />

Over on the P-38 forum is a thread on a P-38 with a serial number of 10000 plus a suffix letter. The thread is "Interesting CYQ" and is, I believe, the same P-38 mentioned in the link provided in the first message of this thread.

I posted on the P-38 forum that I'm unaware of any Imperial era Lugers in the military series of serial numbers that goes to 10000. Then I mentioned the Mauser Luger with serial number 10000g and the thought that both Lugers and P-38 pistols would have been numbered according to military directives. I'm not aware of any such directive. That is not, of course, proof of anything except that we don't have written proof of serial numbers going to 10000.

Looking closely at the pictures of the P-38 with serial number 10000 f, I'm struck by the quality of the finish and smoothness of the machining. CYQ P-38's are noted for their extremely rough machining and this one doesn't display that quality. Also, the final "0" in the slide serial number is off-set, suggesting it was stamped by hand. Finally, the frame serial number just doesn't look "right" as the final "0" is larger than the ones that preceed it.

As for the "K" date Luger, I'm not up to par on Mauser production but, IIRC, Mauser picked up production where BKIW/DWM left off and that wasn't at serial number 1 without a suffix. As no suffix letter is mentioned by the owner, I have to assume that he's suggesting that Mauser began Luger production in the "K" date series at 1 without a suffix letter. I don't have my reference books handy at the moment so I'll have to check that when I get home.

Perhaps MauserLuger can shed some light on the serial range of "K" date Lugers.

At the moment, I'm not convinced that either is correct. But, I'm not closed minded on the issue and I'd like to hear what others think.

Doubs,
Mauser picked up production right where DWM/BKIW left off. DWM was in the u letter suffix block, and Mauser started production in the v letter suffix block. This was virtually all commercial production, and when Mauser started production of the K Date in 1934 they did start with no letter suffix. K Date production was low and only went into the early a letter suffix block, where the G Date production picked up. Mauser continued production of the P08 by simply starting production in the letter suffix block where the previous year had left off rather than starting over at the beginning of the alphabet every year.

To Doubs: Early Spreewerke P.38's had very nice finishes, generally. There was some inconsistency but the very rough finishes didn't come into play until the later suffixes. I have cyq serial #820 and the finish, though worn some, is as good as any Walther made at the same time, maybe somewhat better.

As I mentioned on my web site, Warren Buxton personally inspected and took the pictures of the 10000f example. I trust Warren's assessment of a P.38 as to originality.

Just wanted to welcome you to the Lugerforum Leon...

As you can imagine, there are also many P-38 enthusiasts here, but we generally discuss them on our sister website P38forum.com

To MarkC: All that have examined the 10000 K date and the 10000f cyq P.38 feel that the numbering machine had only 4 digits and went from 9999 to 0000, then the 1 was added. On both examples the "0"'s are stamped a consistent depth and the "1" is stamped slightly deeper.

To your question about all of the Lugers produced with only 1 10000 example, another reply mentions a 1937 10000 numbered Luger and it is pictured in Kenyon's book. My question to you is, with the "millions and millions" of Lugers and P.38's made, have you seen many serial # 1's? How about serial # 2's?

For Walther P.38 production they started the numbering over from 1 every year. That means there should be a lot more # 1 Walther P.38's than # 1 P.38's or Lugers made by Mauser or Spreewerke but I have only heard of one # 1 gun, a Walther 480 code P.38. There are 3 or possibly 4 known 10000 examples. In Buxton Vol. II he pictures a svw45 P.38 with a serial number of 10000e. If that gun is honest that makes 4.

Johnny Peppers, thanks for the Mauser information. I was aware of the serial numbers/suffix letters spanning the years but not certain that "K" date Lugers began at serial number 1. It appears that a 10000 "K" date without suffix letter would be correct. That makes two known Mauser Lugers with a 10000 serial number.

Leon DeSpain, thank you for your response. If Warren Buxton is satisfied that your cyq is correct, that's authoritative enough for me. I didn't know that Spreewerks' early production was that well finished so I learned a couple of things today.

Leon DeSpain and the other member of the forum....

My only question is to why the Germans ended at 10000? We all know the Germans are efficeint, why would they have a stamping machine with more than 4 digits and not use the extra room for a series of guns to follow the extra sequence, 10001, 10002, etc. Also, some of the guns mentioned in this thread have a letter suffix.

Example, if the 10000e or f guns are correct there should be a number of guns (thousands) with the 1xxxx numbers followed by a letter. Granted the 1 numbered guns are rare because they are the begining of a seperate date/series designation of guns... but why would they end at 10000? Seems a waste of serial numbers and tooling to me. I have no proof... so should I not even mention this logic?

If the theory of 5 digit guns were correct, shouldn't we see more 5 digit serial numbers with a letter suffix? How many Lugers do you guys own in the a-z blocks.....??? (Only 4 digit numbers of course) Based on what I know about German quality control, they would not waste an extra serial number block just to have guns that had serial numbers of 10000.

War time control was even more important than commercial serial numbers. It is my understanding that the 4 digit serial numbers with a letter were produced to prevent the allies from knowing exactly how many guns they were making, a four digit serial is much harder to figure out than a five, it was a code of sorts, unlike 1911A1's which just ran through their series of numbers into the millions.....

MarkC

MarkC,

You said there should be thousands of Mauser Lugers with SN 10000x. Not so. Total Mauser Luger production was about 900,000 (Still, "Third Reich Lugers" p. 16) With one Luger so marked from each lot of 10,000 only 90 would have been produced between 1934 and 1942.

We have seen photos of 2 of them -- the K-date in this thread and the 1937 Mauser in Kenyon's, "Lugers at Random." Who is to say these 2 are original? If they are, where are the other 88? Several more should have survived. I like to guess that at least 10% survived the War but who knows?

Personally, I believe Mauser Lugers were marked from 1x to 10000x. I have no basis for this opinion. This opinion is solely based on the near-anal exactitude of the Prussian mind. If guns were stamped from 1-9999, they would actually be produced in lots of 9999 rather than 10000. Gun 1a would then become the 10000 Luger produced. That would create an annoying accounting problem for our precise German who wants to know, not an estimate of production, but to know it precisely!

I cannot fathom the German mind producing Lugers in lots of 9999. It would be "unnatural." I am convinced they produced lots of 10000 for each letter suffix. This only allows 2 possibilities: either 00-9999 or 1 to 10000.

I have seen 2 photos of the latter, none of the former. In the absence of new evidence, I am convinced that the final military Mauser Luger form each lot was SN 10000x. JMHO.

***********************************************

As to the use of a 5-digit die stamp, I am persuaded by Leon's reasoning that the 4-digit die stamp was set to "0000" and the preceding "1" was hand stamped later.

I certainly wish a few more of the original 90 produced would come to light.

FWIW, I have only seen ONE photo of a military Mauser Luger NO. 1, so the fact that we can only account for 2 photos of SN 10000x does not strike me as noteworthy.

Jimbo,

You are a gentleman and a scholar. I also believe the Third Reich German's produced 1 gun with 5 digits every 10,000 for accounting purposes. They didn't have 5 digit machines and a serial number of 0 wasn't acceptable. The fifth digit was added by hand, as has been mentioned. I would like to again make my point of how many of ANY one serial number anyone has seen.
Percentage wise, very few Lugers survived to be captured & brought back or imported after WWII. Besides the guns lost or destroyed in the war, I have talked to a few vets who were returning from Europe with several handguns in their duffle bags. An announcement was made on the ship that an inspection would be done the following morning and anyone found with more than one handgun would be court martialed. They said that all night GI's would go up on deck and drop Luger's, PP's, PPK's, P.38's and who knows what else overboard. The next morning...... no inspection. Sad but true.

Regards, Leon

I once owned Svw/45 P38 #10000e and the 1 infront of the 0000 was definatedly added with a different die set. I'm of the opinion that all lugers and P38s that are numbered 10000, were mistakes. The automatic serial counter rolled over to 0000 and a pistol was numbered. Rather than rework the number, a 1 was added. Tom H.

Hi Tom,

I am confused by your statment, "I'm of the opinion that all lugers and P38s that are numbered 10000, were mistakes. "

I have two questions. Do you believe Lugers were manufactured in lots of 10,000 or 9,999? If you believe they were manufactured in lots of 10,000 then do you believe they series began with 1x and ended with 10000s or do you believe they went from 0000x to 9999x?

Thanks for clarifying the above.

Jim Ferreira

Jimbo,

I think Tom meant that the P38's with the extra number .... was added not to ruin a perfectly good frame !!! The machine op made a mistake and why destroy the frame in war time? Add the 1 or 0 and the gun goes into action, they were military accepted after all ... I've posted my pic of the CYQ 1h... begining of the series.. Russian export... how many of the 1x guns are not reported and in someones nightstand??

Let's review the photo's of the guns we have seen.. (numbers off set from the stamping die, 4 digit) Granted the P38's don't belong on this forum but logic would dictate WWII directives would pass on to P38's... Lugers with 5 digit numbers... I am still.... thinking about it.....

Hope you like the pic of my gun, Russian capture , so?....

Mark

http://boards.rennlist.com/upload/1h.JPG

[quote]Originally posted by Jimbo:
<strong> Do you believe Lugers were manufactured in lots of 10,000 or 9,999?
Jim Ferreira</strong><hr></blockquote>

To the best of my knowledge, there are absolutely NO Imperial military Lugers numbered 10000. The known range is 1 - 9999 and then it was on to another series of 1 - 9999 with the next suffix letter. Surely with DWM and Erfurt producing more than 1,200,000 Lugers from 1908 (1911 for Erfurt) through 1918, at least one or two with serial number 10000 would have surfaced if they existed at all.

The answer to your question seems to be that Imperial Lugers were produced in blocks of 9999 while Nazi Luger and P-38 military pistols MAY have been produced in blocks of 10000. There is evidence that they were but the limited examples are being questioned as possible "one-off" pistols.... mistake corrections and not normal production serial numbers.

Doubs,

As a Luger newbie I am only studying the Mausers for now, so I was unaware the Imperial Lugers were serialed in lots of 9999. That dang Prussian mind, who can understand it! They seem so regimented and then to produce Lugers in lots of 9999 just seems to defy logic.

But as Still required, this is my uninformed opinion and I don't profess to know, just guess. Thanks for enlightening me about the Imperial lugers.

After reviewing this thread four things occur to me.

1. Luger military serial numbering is four digits and a letter suffix (or no suffix, in the case of the first 9,999 pistols). We should be -deeply- suspicious of any deviation, and conservative in weaving speculative webs to justify it.

2. We have only seen the side-frame number on the photographs of the Luger in question. Without seeing the front frame and barrel numbers, all commentary is most highly speculative.

3. Just because the guns are numbered in a 9,999 numbered sequence does not mean that the guns were manufactured in "blocks" of these numbers. There is no reason to suspect that production was not continuous, with simple changing of the serial number dies as necessary.

4. It would be useful to know the mechanism by which the serial numbers were actually stamped on the guns. One correspondent has speculated the use of an incremental-numbering wheel, along with corresponding mistakes in operation. Is there any evidence of the use of such a device?

Alternative speculation: that the serial numbers were applied by placing individual number stamps by hand in a holder, thence stamped on the gun. Such a holder might hold only four numbers (or blank dies in the cases of numbers less than 1,000). Is there any evidence for such a method?

Perchance, does anyone here actually -know- how serial numbers were stamped on Lugers?

I find it interesting to observe that -none- of the numbers on my S/42 are stamped evenly.

--Dwight

Dwight is correct in stating that the pistols were not produced in "blocks" of 9999. That was a poor choice of words on my part and I would have been more correct to have said that Imperial Lugers were numbered in blocks of 1 - 9999 with each year (1911, 1912 etc.) beginning at serial number 1 (no suffix letter) and going to 9999 (no suffix letter).

At that point, the next pistol through the line would have been given number 1 with the suffix letter "a" (or "1a"). The sequence would have continued until they reached "9999a" and then it would begin once more at "1b" and so forth through the alphabet (no letter "j") until the next year began the sequence all over again.

At no time during Imperial German production did Lugers reach the "z" block. Later Mauser production did reach "z" and revert back to "1" (no suffix letter) by not resetting their numbers for each new year. They continued in sequence right through into each new year without a break.

For those who wish to see more...I have added pictures of the serial # on the frame and on the barrel. If the 0000 was stamped by accident, it was done 3 times by accident. See pictures 5 & 6.

http://www.lmd-militaria.com/page41.html

Hello Leon, and welcome to the Forum !

I hope you do not get the impression that we were trying to "pick" on your luger...

As a moderator, some of us find something unusual and post it here to start a topic discussion.

This one has been very informative, at least for this beginner...

Mr. Jan C. Still has departed this Forum, but if you want to contact him via e-mail, his address is :

jcstill@ak.net

(I posted his e-mail, here, as he had done so, previoulsy on the Forum so is no secret...)

Jan might be able to help clarify this issue for you. If you get some good info. from Jan, please be sure to post it here on the Forum so others might learn what Jan has to think about a "10000" numbered luger...

Regards,

Pete... <img src="graemlins/yltype.gif" border="0" alt="[typing]" />

Pete,

Thanks for the comments. I think some scepticism is prudent. The only thing I will say about this situation is that several were very quick to label my gun a fake just because they had not seen one like it before and, as such, didn't believe what they were seeing was original and correct.

I purchased the 10000 K date from a very advanced collector who had built a 40 year collection. He was an engineer, studied guns carefully and was one of the most knowledgeable collecor's I have ever known. He knew Third Reich pistol and rifle finishes like the back of his hand. He owned approximately 1000 of them, had at one time or another possessed 1000's more and collected full time. He could spot a bad gun from several feet away.

While it was in his hands another very well known Luger collector, who shall remain nameless, personally examined the gun but wouldn't come across with the bucks to purchase it at the time, I would guess. After I purchased it he made a very attractive offer in trade items for the 10000 K. He is a very advanced collector, very knowledgeable and I am sure he would not want to acquire a fake for his collection.

Regards, Leon

Hi, a friend of mine has a Mauser #10000 in 100% original condition. Next time i am there i try to take a pic of it.