bore corrosion
 

I am looking at what I believe to be a 1920 Commercial Luger (after spending lots of time searching the forums to identify it). It is serial # 94XX with the script letter O below the number. Most of the parts are stamped with the serial number, or the last 2 digits of it. The bluing appears original, based on the fact that it has not been dipped, and is in the 95% range(I only see one corner with it worn off and one small rust spot under the right grip. The strawing (something I learned about here) is quite noticeable. The wooden grips are light colored, clean and not damaged. I don't know what type wood it is. The gun appears to have had little use judged by the external appearance.
The barrell is another story. The bore looks like it rusted badly and then had ammo fired through it. I have never seen a barrell so bad. I have fired the gun, and at 20 yards it is as accurate as I can shoot it. I have seen some posts on corrosive ammo. I have never heard of that before. Could that have done the extensive damage to this gun? I intend to buy the gun. I like the way these old guns look, and it shoots nicely. I would hate to ruin the originality of the gun, but should I have it rebarrelled? My first instinct is to leave it alone....but it's a shame because the rest of the gun is SOOO clean.

Thanks!

Follow your first instinct. If it ain't broke, don't fix it. Why "ruin the originality" of a gun that shoots great just for a cosmetic change that can't be seen? Spare yourself the expense and enjoy it for what it is. Just my 2 cents.

Ditto. :) ...and welcome to the Lugerforum!

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana,Tahoma,Arial,Helvetica,Geneva">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana,Tahoma,Arial,Helvetica,Geneva">Originally posted by 1rp12:
<strong>The barrell is another story. The bore looks like it rusted badly and then had ammo fired through it. I have never seen a barrell so bad. I have fired the gun, and at 20 yards it is as accurate as I can shoot it. </strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana,Tahoma,Arial,Helvetica,Geneva">There have been numerous posts like this, the barrel looks like heck, yet shoots accurate!

So, if it shoots good, leave her alone and be proud of her. How many people look down your barrel, and if they do, whip out a target...

:)

Ed

I don't know if I am wrong in my thinking but isn't there a safety issue if you shoot a gun with a rough barrel? I always thought that safety means more than originality. I would rather have a pistol with a changed barrel than risk having a magazine fed hand granade. To me if you shoot it change the barrel and keep the original, if you are a collector and don't plan to shoot then keep it original. I think if you really needed to you could have the original barrel put back on and still remain 100% original. It works the same with vintage guitar amplifiers. If it potentially unsafe to use then make it safe, why risk a finger or an eye because you think your safe. I have always been taught that if the bore of you gun looks rough don't shoot it. Originality doesn't mean a thing if the pistol Kabooms while you are shooting it. Just think about that! Thanks Arvin

My 1920 is a 9mm and has a bore frosted with tiny pits, and the edges of the lands are somewhat rounded. Still, it shoots to point of aim at 25 yards, which is the only distance I have fired it. I have no plan to change this barrel as long as it is functional. In fact, it seems to be a very accurate pistol. As long as there is some definition to the lands, and the chamber is in good condition, the barrel should be fine. A really shot barrel could possibly be lined, but there have been problems with some shops' work.

Unless the diameter of the bore has been decreased by a buildup of rust and debris, there is no danger in shooting a Luger with a pitted bore. When I was a kid I hunted with an old 25-20 Winchester '92 that had a bore that looked like a plowed field. Not only did it not blow up, I could bark a squirrel with it.

I had a 1917 Erfurt come in my shop about a year ago, bore was completely gone, yet chamber still head spaced good and was thus safe too shoot...still being shot today. Poor bore is one thing, head space is another.

Wow! 7 replies in one day!.
Thanks everyone for your input.

Policeluger-the chamber is fine. I dind't check the headspace like I have done with my .45 reloads, but I won't be reloading this one anyway.

JS- Thanks for the Welcome!

Ed T.- I got a good chuckle..whip out a target... :-)

Arvin- Thanks for the word of caution. There is basically surface corrosion in the barrell. None of it is deep enough to hurt the integrity of the barrell, I don't think. There are plenty of craters in the valleys between the rifle lands, and smaller pits on top of the rifling.

Ron W.- there are no high spots. If there were, they were knocked off by the current owner long before I looked at it (he hasn't shot it since the 50s).

Where does everyone here find .30 Luger ammo? The two closest gunshops are wanting about $45.00/box. A bit steep for my taste...and I really don't want to reload a tapered round.

Thank you again.

Joe

To what extent should bore condition mirror external condition? When do differences suggest refinishing or replacements?

In my opinion, for a collector weapon poor bore condition is never justification for replacement of an original barrel. For a shooting weapon, barrel replacement is only necessary when the condition of the bore degrades accuracy.

Check Gun List for some of the better deals on .30 Luger ammo. Reloads or not, you need too check the head space and watch your spent brass for signs of high pressure/head space problems.

Freisch�¼tz,

When considering Lugers, bore condition does not necessarily relate to external condition. This very often has to do with the fact that most Lugers were fed a diet of corrosive ammunition, and this is sometimes reflected in even the best-kept gun. Very often bore condition is only minimally reflected in the valuation of a collection-quality Lugers.

As far as when you replace or refinish, what Ron said.

--Dwight

"Barking squirrels"...hmmm. Have'nt heard that one in a while. Maybe a few years ago from a "senior" blackpowder shooter <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="wink.gif" />

Happy New Year Ron...

I am not one for believing that original is better. You have to think that a Luger is a tool and not a showpiece. Keeping mine in top shape means more than it does to keep it original. I bought mine as a shooter but still if I had any collector gun that I take to the range I would still change the barrel. My safety means more to me than collector value. Just remember it is cheaper to replace a barrel than an eye or a finger. Plus I keep my Luger ready for home defense so the fact that it has to function perfectly 100% of the time is more important to me. The one thing I have been taught over the years is you can't keep everything 100% original and still keep them running. Eventually they will need maintenence. As far as barrel condition and replacement goes. Milage will vary here. Accuracy does degrade with the barrel pitting, but it might not be noticable enough to care. I lived long enough with military personal to know that condition of your barrel means everything in a life and death situation. To me if you can't get a clean patch while cleaning then it is time to look at the barrel. It might be something as easy as running a good bore paste thru to clean it up or something as complex as a barrel change. Chances are with an 84 year old gun I would rather have piece of mind with a new barrel. But I guess that's just me. I guess I spend more time shooting and cleaning my guns then looking at them and dusting them. I am an avid shooter, not a collector. But that's just me. Thanks Arvin

Arvin, I have a few shooter lugers and then some I have quit shooting, they simply cost to much to screw them up.

I am curious, unless there is an obstruction in the barrel, how would a moderatly pitted barrel cause a safety issue? The gases can escape easier rather than slower, thus making the velocity go down?

Now, a pitted out, with rust intact barrel or pitted out barrel with damage is no way to go, and safety is #1.

I was in the military for a long time and one thing I learned was that more guns are damaged by over-cleaning than by shooting or simple neglect?

So, safety is #1, but I guess why change the barrel if it shoots good and is safe?

And if you think it is unsafe than do what you want, it is your gun. From what I understand, once a luger barrel is taken off, it usually doesn't go back on again safely? Lugerdoc or Hugh?

Ed

I am having a hard time understanding the logic of if it shoots good it shouldn't matter. First of all it is a commercial Luger. They don't have much collectability anyways. How would a moderatly pitted out barrel cause a safety issue. Because pitting and rust are obstructions, plus the lands and groove of a barrel are suppose to provide a smooth unobstructed path for the bullet to travel along. The thing I have to ask you Edward is why not put your shooter Lugers back into service. I rather have a functional gun than a 2 pound paper weight. True, more damage is done by cleaning than shooting but simple neglect can turn bad if not taken care of. To me once pitting starts there is no way to stop it. It just keeps going unless you can remove the pitting entirely. Now if this was about a rare Luger or military Luger things might be different. But still, I will stand my ground that bad things happen when you least expect them too and it doesn't take much for a pistol to kaboom. Plus 1rp12 stated it looked like the barrel rusted bad and then had ammo fired thru it. I just would take any chances. It is better to be safe than sorry. Thanks Arvin

Arvin, that is what makes this forum a good one. We have slight differences, but with your safety concerns, you can stand next to me and go shooting any day :)

I just hate to pop a new barrel on a gun that is otherwise still a collectable gun, even if in good shape, a shooter, goes for shooter prices and by putting on a new barrel you might drop the price a hundred to a couple of hundred?

BUT, a nice shooting, safe gun is a heck of a lot better than a 2.4 lb paper-weight!!

:D

Ed

Arvin,

I have tried to remain out of the discussion of what is safe and what isnâ??t to some degree. However, experience has to count for something. You seem to be overly cautious concerning bore corrosion and ignore the comments of individuals who have actually owned and fired Lugers and other firearms with less than perfect bores. I respect and applaud safety, but there is a broad distinction between caution and unwarranted fear. I can only assume that either you have experienced a catastrophic failure of a weapon with a pitted bore or personally known someone who has. If this is not the case, then I suggest you might condescend to let Luger owners enjoy their 80+ year-old guns and not rush out to destroy what cannot be replaced.

Removal and replacement of an original barrel is seldom a successful process. To attain and maintain the proper headspace of a barrel when installing requires a crush fit in the final tightening of the barrel to the receiver. The elastic properties of both barrel and receiver after over a half century is unlikely to allow a re-installed barrel to sustain the same torque required to properly align the barrel and maintain headspace. Not to mention the damage that is almost certainly to be incurred in the process, as pointed out by Rick W, unless accomplished by skilled gunsmith with the proper tools and experience. And even then, success is not assured.

With regard to â??it doesn't take much for a pistol to kaboomâ?�, I will say it takes a lot to make a Luger â??kaboomâ?� and a pitted bore isnâ??t one of them. Your assertion: â??To me once pitting starts there is no way to stop it. It just keeps going unless you can remove the pitting entirelyâ?� is, in my opinion, another over-statement that does not have any relevance to occasional firing of a collector grade Luger.

I totally agree with you that it is better to be safe than sorry. I only admonish that if you have that much concern about safety, get a shooter Luger and do with it what you wish. Donâ??t mess up a collector Luger nor encourage others to do so. There is a diminishing supply of original Lugers, and we are the caretakers of what remains to be able to pass them on to future generations.

I respect your opinion,I just disagree.
Ron

Ed,
I agree. But I guess I am in the 1 percent of people who would pay a little extra for a new barrel. I don't see a barrel change as a big deal unless you are talking about a Artillery Luger or any other rare variation. I don't know if it would drop the price too much unless a collector is buying it, but then again with my experiences in other field collectors look for any way possible to get things as cheap as possible for themselves. I have seen vintage guitar collectors nit pick guitars to make sellers drop thier prices. I guess collectability is a 2 way street. You never know what something is worth until someone hands you cash for it. Thanks Arvin

Ron,
I wasn't encouraging anyone to mess up a collector Luger unless you think all Lugers are collectable. I was just stating that if you are gonna shoot a Luger you should make sure it is safe to do so. I think people should get out of the sheep like state of mind that you are destroying something if you change it to make it useable. I bet you also disagree with restoring a Luger too? As far as the kabooming goes, a brand new pistol can kaboom. There is no single factor in a kaboom and thinking that it possibly can't happen to you isn't thinking smartly. I know I am the new kid when it come to being on this forum, but I spend more time shooting then playing on the computer. "There is a diminishing supply of original Lugers, and we are the caretakers of what remains to be able to pass them on to future generations." But as caretakers we should think ahead and make sure they are still in working order for future generations. There is no unwarranted fear here. I just caution people who don't think that pitting or rust doesn't alter your weapon. It does, they weren't designed to be rusty were they? Look at everything collectable in this world and then look at this topic. Oh my it is a crime to change a barrel on a Luger but antique car collectors don't complain about changing brake pads or tires or even complain about rebuilding an engine. Just remember that a Luger is a tool nothing more and like most tools they were made to be maintained. I rather have a useable weapon than to have a paper weight that someone says is valuable. If it is both useable and valuable than good but to neglect a weapon because you might hurt its value is silly. At least we don't have any laws like in Britian where we can't have private firearms. To me the question always comes to mind. Why own something if you don't use it? So changing a barrel is considered destroying a gun, which means that restoration is also destroying too? Thanks Arvin

Arvin,

Your points on restoration are well taken. However, standards vary from hobby to hobby. Within the antique car community, considerable effort is made to restore vehicles to original and operable condition. This is acceptable and encouraged for this hobby. Other collectables do not follow those rules. Coin and stamp collectors are on the opposite end of the spectrum. Nothing may be done to enhance the condition of a specimen. Lugers fall somewhere in between. For most Luger collectors, a Luger in 95% or better original condition is a very desirable find, and restoration or alteration diminishes its worth. It is difficult to find specimens that have withstood the ravages of time and mistreatment, consequently choosing not to apply any ministration other than cleaning and preserving is not considered neglect, and certainly not â??sillyâ?�. Conversely, some Lugers are in such poor state of preservation or operational condition that restoration, to include re-barreling, will enhance their worth and safety. I need only point out the restoration efforts of the forum member â??Thorâ?� that have transformed pitiful examples to objects of beauty that command prices approaching original specimens. Also, there have been examples of very rare Lugers and other early firearms that were so decimated by rust and damage that restoration has been fully justified to preserve a historical item. To address your comment specifically, yes, depending on the firearm in question, restoration and/or changing a barrel on a weapon is considered destroying a gun.

What is and isnâ??t operationally safe is not a â??sheep like state of mind that you are destroying something if you change it to make it useableâ?�. I think the fundamental difference in our views lies in what constitutes â??safe to shootâ?�. You appear to be of the opinion that a pitted bore is unsafe to shoot, and I am convinced that it isnâ??t. You obviously are not a collector, and there is nothing wrong with that. You donâ??t have the mindset of a collector; therefore shooting and safety are foremost in your consideration.

I apologize profusely for subjecting you and the readership to my lengthy tirade, but as a long time collector who has very strong feelings about the preservation of the hobby, I sometimes get carried away. And although you think I am â??not thinking smartlyâ?�, I thank you for the opportunity to state my case.

Ron,
Point taken. But there comes a point where a pitted barrel could be unsafe. I would tell people to just go out and shoot something without knowing if it is safe to do so. The thing that struck me funny is the way everyone chimed in and no one even had one consideration for safety.And another thing that struck me funny was the way you answered. "Why "ruin the originality" of a gun that shoots great just for a cosmetic change that can't be seen?" Well The thing is it isn't cosmetic as it is functional. I don't want everyone to think that barrel pitting is cosmetic. I don't know what to think about collectors. I rather have my piece of history usable than as a display piece. After all it was designed for use and not display. As for Thor, I have seen the before and after pictures and I think is is a shining example of a craftsman. Another thing Ron is both you and I are perfect examples of of people being on the opposite sides of the fence. And I think we both provide some good arguments and I think we have provided some good reading for others. Thanks Arvin

Gentlemen,
Thank you for stating your opinions so clearly on this matter. I also compliment your abilities to disagree in a civilized manner. Too many discussion boards exist already where civility doesn't exist. It makes it hard to take anyone seriously when that happens.
I have acquired the Luger. I have decided not to rebarrel it, for a couple of reasons.
It is not a competitive target gun.
It has more value to me being in "as found" condition.
Ron's warning about rebarreling sometimes not being successful anyway.

Thanks again for your help and advice.
Joe