Test Eagle and Holster
 

Eric asked me to post this photo of his US Test Trial Luger and Rock Island Arsenal holster for him.
http://forum.lugerforum.com/lfupload/testdisplay2.jpg

ERIC, I have taken some detailed photographs and closeups of the test Luger, serialed number #6786, and the rarest US test holster. one thousand were manufactured for the ROCK ISLAND ARSENAL, It is reported in '1900 LUGER, Publised by MICHAEL REESE II, and distributted as follows, 10 to United States Military Academy, 15 to the Presario, San Francisco, 10 to Fort Hamilton, 40 to Fort Ridley, 5 to each commanding officer of the 185 troops of our cavery, for a total of the 1000,I would invite any comments or inquiries. My question was who produced the 200,000 rounds of ammunition, and where can i find a box, a Luger with a great tail.

pretty sure it was DWM that prodeuced the rounds. For the 45 rounds, Frankford (US arsenal) made them and they were not happy with the results. In fact, I remember reading of the rounds coming over in the shipment, if I remember right.

ed

Eric,
G. van Vlimmern has already given you the best answer you are likely to get, that the rounds were provided by DWM. Since there were no 7.65mm firearms in the U.S. Army inventory prior to acquiring the Test Lugers, there would be no ready source for ammunition in the U.S. Therefore DWM, as probably the largest ammunition producer in the world at that time, would have supplied the rounds to be used in their Lugers. Quoting from page 40 of Reese's book, "200 rounds of German manufactured ammunition were issued with each pistol". Also as Gerben has indicated, the rounds would most likely have been the truncated cone type. Individual rounds are difficult to find and a full box would be real treasure and quite expensive.

Case Closed, thanks guys!

ED, Could you tell me where you were reading about the ammo. Im beginning to think, if you dont own it, it wasn't written!

" Stuff That Dreams Are Made Of "

Ron/Eric...

Should the US Test holster have some inspector's initials stamped on the bottom end of the closure flap ?

Also...does Eric's hoster have "RIA/E.H.S. stamped along its back ?

Both traits of a true Test holster, if I recall previous postings about them in the past on the LF and over at Jan's place...

" All of the issue "left-handed" (or right-handed butt forward) that I have seen bear the RIA/E.H.S. stamp plus inspector's initials on the front flap. "

The holster is dubious per Pete's comments. Additionally, the lack of verdegris is a red flag.

Tom A

Fake is not what Eric was told in a detailed email that I was cc'd on... but I should let the person who told him that; give his take on it...


Ed

I am curious to know what was the source of the quotes in Pete's post above about the RIA/E.H.S. It is stated that 1000 holsters were made and that "everyone that I have seen" had this stamping PLUS inspector's markings on the flap. Could it be that some that he didn't see may have left RIA without inspector's marks? Does this mean that if one encounters a rare 1900 test holster that looks right as rain but if the inspector's mark is absent then it is "de facto" a fake or reproduction?

The back of Eric's holster is properly marked with RIA/E.H.S. and there is a hint of verdigris on the brass. If you look at the Test holster in Vanderlinden's book you will note that there are no inspector's initials on the flap.

ERIC, Before we posted this holster, it was scruitenised by a number or our luger elders. There were minor variations, the same with lugers, I would gladly submit beautiful closeups, the best of over fifty taken, Its always good however to doubt something that seems, to good. And finally, let me formaly thank Ron for volunteering to examine this piece of American History, Thank You! Eric Bruning,Esq

The partial quote in my previous posting was from :

A discussion in the Holster section,
Back in 8-25-2004,
Discussion titled "1902 Test Eagle Holster",
Thread started by member RAHamilton.

Hot link :

http://forum.lugerforum.com/showthre...t=test+holster

Ron Wood made the posting. Here it is in its entirety :

(Begin quote)

Guess I will have to stick my neck out a little here. I do not believe it is a commercial holster, nor do I think it is a revolver holster. I do not know much about early US military holsters, but I do not think the 1900 era revolver holsters were full flap as this one is.

I think the chances are very good that this holster is authentic. As has been noted, it is a non-standard "right-handed" version. All of the issue "left-handed" (or right-handed butt forward) that I have seen bear the RIA/E.H.S. stamp plus inspector's initials on the front flap. ALL of the right-handed versions that I have seen or have heard of DO NOT have any markings other than the US cartouche on the front flap (with the exception of the one that was offered a couple of times on auctions that had been made into a right-handed version by turning it inside out). My opinion on these right-handed holsters is that they were made up by the arsenal for possible consideration but were not meant to be issued, and therefore were not arsenal/inspector stamped.

I have personally seen and handled the right-hand holster formerly owned by John Morgan (photos of his consecutively numbered 1902 prototype Lugers are in Kenyon's "Lugers at Random") and now owned by John Eckert. It is identical to the holster in this discussion. There are at least four of these right-handed holsters in existence. I think the one Jan Still has pictured in â??Imperial Lugersâ?� had the lanyard loop added because that was a feature of the Army service revolver holster at the time, so an example was made up as one of the options to consider.

These are my personal opinions and there is not a shred of evidence to substantiate my suggestions. It seems the trend lately to soundly trounce on suppositions or speculations (not necessarily on this forum) that havenâ??t been previously written up by the pundits. But what the heck, it isnâ??t any fun if you canâ??t walk on the wild side and shake things up a bit once in a while.

Join in the fun and flame away,

Ron

(end quote)

Thanks, Pete, for re-posting Ron's statement. I feel better now since I saw what one might consider to be the fifth right handed holster today. Of course, it might be one of the four reported previously, I do not know. It has been in a fifty year plus old collection that is being liquidated slowly. It contained an absolutely pristine 99% test eagle in the 8600 series. I'm pretty certain that the holster did not have inspector marks on the flap.

So I guess I "don't" know what you were saying Pete??? I thought were you trying to show it as a fake? From the entire write up, it does not soundd that way, but the opposite...

Coming to out and out conclusions is good, but pointing us in the right direction is also helpful. If YOu beleive it to be fake, then maybe say so, but if you beleive it to be real then also say so?


ed

Ed,

Based on my readings and the more scholarly previous discussions, I believed a "legit" TE holster of the right-side, butt forward design was to have both the stampings in the leather on the back and the inspector initial stampings on the front flap, along its bottom.

I noticed Eric's holster did not have the initials on the front flap and so I also asked about what the back may have.

The Robert Hamilton discussion centered around the more curious left-side, butt forward holster design.

In that discussion, I recalled Ron had made a pretty strong statement about the right-side, butt forward TE holsters and what markings he had seen.

That is why I posted up the quotation...

BTW...I just looked at two (2) TE holsters that Chuck Whittaker has photos posted of on his Land-o-Borchardt site. They are shown with other holsters in his "Accessories" pull-down tab.

http://www.landofborchardt.com/

Front and back photos of the 2 holsters are shown. Both have the back-side stampings as Ron Wood mentions but both appear NOT to have the inspector's initials along the bottom portion of the front closure flap...

Both of the TE holsters on Whitttaker's site are the right-side, butt forward type...just like Eric's photo.

SOoooo....the issue is quite confusing in my mind...that is, if TE holsters of the right-side, butt forward design should have inspectors initials along the bottom of the front flap or not...???...like this one...

http://forum.lugerforum.com/lfupload..._rig_photo.jpg

Doc,

Did you have a typo in your last posting...???

"...an absolutely pristine 99% test eagle in the 8600 series..."

Not sure if I would trust a TE in the 86xx serial range...;)

Regarding a pristine 99% TE Luger...

Here is what another Member posted about another reported mint TE luger some time ago :

"...just because Test Guns were sent to Cuba, Manila, PA, Puerto Rico and carried by cav soldiers, why would it look too nice..."

Some sage advice herein...

pETE, FASCINATING DISCUSSION :)

You're right, Pete. It was supposed to be the 7600 series.