Interesting Post WW1 Commercial
 

Simpson Ltd has what they refer to simply as a 1923 Commercial, Cat# D-321, C40379. The five digit serial number is very high, 95386.

Pretty good photos of this Luger are on Simpson's site. Just bring up his site and search either number I mentioned above.

What makes this gun interesting to me, other than it's serial number, are characteristics that seem to have gone unnoticed.

First off it is a long frame, the trigger bar is not relieved, it has no grip safety, and the barrel has been replaced.

Unless I'm wrong, the only long frame Luger with a stock lug and no grip safety is a 1908 Navy

For me the mystery is why such an early featured pistol would be assembled so late, according to its serial number, if its serial number is actually an extension of the normal DWM five digit commercial serial range. Or maybe the pistol was assembled from parts by somebody other than DWM.

From best I can tell from the photos the number font seems be the same all around the gun. The serial number on the left flat of the barrel extension appears to me to have been hand stamped. The barrel is proofed but unnumbered, as a replacement probably would be. Normally the barrel and extension, as a unit, would be numbered under the barrel. For this unnumbered replacement it makes sense to me that the Luger might be numbered as it is on the left side of the extension. Much easier than hand stamping the barrel.

The description says the barrel is four inches, I doubt that. Being 30 Luger, post war, I'd think it more likely to be 98m/m. I'd also like to know if the flange at the base is thinner than the usual, from being machined to fit the longer extension than that of a normal 1920/23 Commercial.

The rear sight is a notch but could be anything by replacing the rear toggle. It does, however, to me, appear to have been numbered at the same time with the same stamp as other part numbers.

I believe that this Luger, in its present configuration, was assembled to be what it is. I just have no opinion as to why. I also believe that the base used for this gun was rejected 1908 Navy frame and slide, put to commercial use. To see if the toggle axle pin has a wide flange would help in this.


Unless more information comes to light, although very nice, I don't see this as much more than a pricey curiosity, a nice conversation piece.

I'd like the opinions of others, whether pro or con, on this gun and what my thoughts are on it.


Jack

This particular Luger is serial numbered almost 4,000 number higher than the usually accepted end of five digit commercial serial numbers at 92000.

Even if evidence existed to prove that it left the DWM factory with that number, it's still terribly overpriced IMO.

There are serial numbers in the Commercial data base that exceed 94k. Post-WWI assembly of Commercial Lugers involved scraping all possible parts together, IIRC, so the long frame with unrelieved sear bar and stock lug and without grip safety may not be so anachronistic or unexpected.

My impression is that the dimensional difference between short and long frames would probably exceed the entire extent of the flange.

ithacaartist, the difference in length between the long and short frame is 2m/m.

I'm going to respectfully disagree with you that post WWI assembly of Commercial Lugers involved scraping all possible parts together, at least for DWM in respect to the five digit serial numbered 1923 Commercials. I believe they are of new manufacture. Except for markings and a new barrel they are the same as a 1914 standard military.

At wars end DWM was still at full production. There was a short pause but, they didn't have to start trying to scrounge up all the surplus Lugers, and of their own manufacture at that, they could get to try to stay in business. Germany was not defeated, they negotiated an armistice and agreed to the terms of a treaty. Germany was never occupied. They were in dire straights but, they were not down and out.

When I say new manufacture I'm not saying everything fresh out of the foundry or fresh off the lathe. Some of that, barrels for sure but, a lot of new old stock. DWM's new old stock was still being used by Mauser in instances all through their production and into 1945 and 1946, when they continued putting Lugers together for the French. The LP08 barrels and rear sights were of WW1 DWM manufacture.

I can't think of ever seeing a five digit 1923 Commercial other than having a 98m/m barrel in .30 Luger. I've seen two Safe/Loaded with six inch barrels but, the barrels on both were un-numbered and stamped GERMANY. That pretty much indicates a replaced barrel to me. Both guns were marked GERMANY on the frame above the trigger guard and they both were C/N proofed. Since they had been pressure tested, that, to me, says they had had other barrels before the six inch ones.

I'm not definitively saying no such thing as a 1923 Commercial Navy or Artillery in the post WW1 Commercial serial range exists but, I am saying I'd need to see at least a good photograph to be convinced.

For the "1923 Commercial" subject of this thread, I say it's way out of character for a 1923 Commercial in both its serial number and configuration.


Jack

Jack, I was sloppy in my phrasing, and would better have said that DWM assembled some NOS parts post-war, which would explain a long frame appearing late.

I agree that slapping a 6" barrel onto a P.08 doesn't make it a Navy. Weren't Stoeger and other outlets in the states known for applying custom-length barrels to order?

The frame serial number stamps are not characteristic of contemporaneous DWM number stamps. I'm afraid this pistol tells us nothing about the potential for authentic DWM production in this high-number serial range.

--Dwight

You can check with Bob Simpson regarding you concerns!