1912 Dwm
 

This is a new 1912 DWM I got today, it has the hold open added, is all matching, including grips, and has an unfluted firing pin and unrelieved sear bar!

It is in the military manner for serial number placement, and the witness mark is right on.

I don't have a 1912, either military or police, so intend on keeping this one.

I also bought an 8 inch 30 Luger shooter, and I noticed the barrel hole diameter was the same size, so assumed it wasn't a 30, but a 9mm. I got a 30 luger cartridge and it fits into the barrel and a 9mm doesn't.


http://forum.lugerforum.com/lfupload/1912jb3.jpg

http://forum.lugerforum.com/lfupload/1912a.jpg
http://forum.lugerforum.com/lfupload/1912h.jpg
http://forum.lugerforum.com/lfupload/1912d.jpg
http://forum.lugerforum.com/lfupload/1912e.jpg
http://forum.lugerforum.com/lfupload/1912f.jpg
http://forum.lugerforum.com/lfupload/1912b.jpg

Ed, Really great! Better send the grips to Hugh Clark...Is that the carpet they put in your house? Must be in the bedroom.....Jerry

hand-towel in the kitchen, I had to warsh it before Terry got home, as I kind of cleaned both luggers on it!


ed

Ed,

Congratulations on your 1912 DWM. As I am sure you know, not many of these were manufactured . . . about 10,000 according to "Imperial Lugers."

I can't comment on the effect of relining, but I did take note of the serial number and the fact that it is marked in the military convention, not the commercial. I have added it to my 1911 - 1912 database. Thanks.

Luke

I didn't have your e-mail Luke (new computer), or I'd sent you the info direct!

Have you gotten closer on when they went from comm to military markings?

:)

ed

Yo Ed, Not a bad looking 1912. I have to tell you the towel sucks though.:)

Don't understand what you are trying to say. Is the 8" shooter a .30 and you thought it was a 9mm? Are you thinking of having relined to a 9mm? Or is it shot out?? Whut!!!??

Ron

The 8 inch is a 30 luger, I knew that, ahead of time.

This 1912, well, usually they are 9mm right? ;) So, when I saw that the bore diameter was the same as on the 8 inch, it was one of two things? Either the 8 inch was a 9mm or the 1912 was a 30 luger, so I checked them out.


Ed

Ed, thanks for the "heads up" on your 1912. Luke is right on, this is a representative of the rarest DWM P.08 military. Congratulations! What does the bottom of the magazine look like? Didn't the switch from large perpendicular numbers to smaller parallel numbers occur in 1912, or was it 1913?

I meant to take a picture Doc, it is a wood bottom, and has 1515 lightly stamped (or lightly left from years of use). The numbers are left to right.

I told RW that I'd keep it, as you don't run into 1912's very often, wish it wasn't a reline, but he'd given me a good price, so what the heck.

Ed

Ed, Are you absolutely positive that it is relined? Got a good clear closeup photo of the muzzle?

Ron

Doc,

Switch to small, crosswise magazine numbers was 1912 production.

--Dwight

Dwight -

That answer leads to another interesting question. When did the changeover actually occur? Was it at the beginning of 1912 of during the 1912 production run?

I have a low serial number 1912 DWM (787) but do not have the matching magazine. This one came with an Erfurt magazine; not much help.

Anyone have a 1912 DWM, low serial number, matching magazine?

Luke