Witness mark on my DWM 1917
 

Can anyone please let me know their opinions on this witness mark that is on my DWM 1917.

Thanks.

http://i118.photobucket.com/albums/o116/weekf/sdj.jpg
http://i118.photobucket.com/albums/o116/weekf/hwh46.jpg

Vernon,

There is a whole section in the archives here on witness marks. Perfect alignment is not always the necessary to be correct.

Hi all just checking again if anyone able to provide any comment on the witness mark on my Luger?

Thanks.

From this photo, the mark the receiver was applied before the bluing, and the mark on the barrel is after the bluing, which makes lots of sense to me -- one of them had to be fixed to align the other one (floating one) to it. From what I read in the past, was the theory saying both were floating (i.e. both applied as the result of a single 'blow').... I had hard time to make sense out of single blow theory.

Edit: Most important, it looks good to me :)

What opinions are you looking for??? Why the barrel mark is deeper than the receiver mark??? That it "protrudes" into the receiver??? That the receiver marks don't quite line up???

I have read the many discussions on witness marks here, and the best I can deduce from the many other opinions is that the "witness mark" is a helpful aid to aligning the barrel to the receiver but is not a definitive alignment mark. For me, when I'm rebarreling a Luger, or Mauser, or Lahti, it serves as a means of incrementally tuning the horizontal strike of the bullet...without moving the front sight...(center the front sight, twitch the barrel to center the bullet strike, then move the front sight to correct individual users shooting habits)...

Whether the armorers/manufacturers of the pistol intended it for that use is open to conjecture...

It could just be a quick & dirty way to get a 90º placement of the front sight to the receiver...

For me, I don't buy the theory that it was intended to re-align the barrel if it was ever removed...Simply because I can not imagine a reason to re-attach a barrel after it is removed...There is no maintenance that would require removal...so why remove it in the first place??? Only reason to remove a barrel is to replace it...with another one...with another witness mark...

Spent whole day to replace a broken pipe and vault in my bathroom myself (yeah! saved some $$ for guns). Supposed to be simple, but I'm very inexperienced in this, so it took me hours. I noticed metal against metal screwing still has considerable amount of elasticity-- a tight screw can still be turned tighter when I applied bigger force.

If Luger barrel is same, that mark can help determine how tight is tight enough. Weird enough, the pipe maker never did this and all depends on my estimation.

Thought it again.

This mark was used to guarantee front sight being upright. The screw itself could not guarantee that, even if it's made accurately, because the angle also depended on installation. For whatever reason if the barrel need to be removed, and then reinstalled, it could be installed at right angle without any special measuring tool.

If this is correct (I don't know), then the mark on receiver could be placed anywhere, German just picked up the bottom middle position (one fixed position needed to be picked up anyway from manufacturing process point of view). Installing the barrel, measuring the front sight angle, then making a mark on the barrel at the corresponding position.

As far as I know, Dwight Gruber's article on witness marks in the Technical Information section of the LugerForum is the most thorough and definitive discussion of this topic.