Please help me identify this broom handle
 

What is this?

I think it’s a Prussian contract red nine reworked into a 1920….but I am not certain.

There is no 1920 stamped on it, and no Prussian proof mark, although both of those are not necessarily on the guns of each genre. It’s not a Bolo, grip is too big and its a 9mm out of the gate.

What do these proof marks on the underside of the barrel designate, if anything?

https://i.imgur.com/TohcHHHh.jpg

1920 rear sight for sure

https://i.imgur.com/O6eklwNm.jpg

Barrel serial numbers – all internal parts and exteriors marks match the new serial number.

https://i.imgur.com/Q5lx7Z7m.jpg

Right side

https://i.imgur.com/ERgAleHl.jpg

More serial number markings – matching

https://i.imgur.com/OsAq6P0h.jpg

Rear grip…I was told these are from the Berlin Police department…

https://i.imgur.com/JITIcZcl.jpg



Any information would be appreciated. I intend to shoot this gun so I don’t have to brass dive for the precious 7.63 mauser…as I have tons or 9mm..OK not tons, maybe half a ton.

Yes,
it appears to be a "1920" era rework of a Red 9 to 4" police length.
The grip marking is to the Schupo of Koeln(Cologne) ; not Berlin.

Thanks very much!

Any idea on the barrel stamps? The MH is something I have never seen

Looks like the upper was renumbered to match the rest of the gun. So my thought is it was possibly a 30 cal, then converted with the upper to a 9mm. Looks like period work though.

The marks are worker's markings and Mauser marking, not proof marks. You will see the "mh" on most/many Mauser broomhandles.

No doubt the upper has been re-numbered, when and/or why is just speculation. The font and the numbers do not look period to me.

The upper likely was replaced with one with a previously shortened barrel. The griip strap marking is from the Schupo of Inspektion Mitte (Inspectorate for the Center district of Cologne). The Cologne C96s are an interesting group (HWIS pp 123-5).

Don, you are da bomb!!

Gregg, your Cologne reworked police red nine appears to have a relieved or cut out stock slot, an unusual feature that has been observed on other Cologne 1920 red nines. Thanks for showing your example.http://luger.gunboards.com/showthrea...-koln-(cologne)
B Regds, John

That’s a gun with at least two histories.

Easy stuff first. The marks on the bottom of the barrel are Mauser factory inspection stamps and not proof marks. Their exact purpose and usage is unknown, but it is believed these are manufacturing control point stamps.

The barrel extension (SN 118207) and frame extension (SN 133855) are from two different pistols. Both serial numbers are within the serial number range of the Imperial German army contract for C96 pistols factory chambered for 9 mm/ Luger (collector speak, “Red Nine C96”). This contract was for 150,000 pistols, with circa 135,000 actually delivered before the end of the war. Several thousand undelivered pistols from this contract were sold commercially after the war, and are usually found w/o the characteristic red nine grip panels.

That said, the barrel extension doesn’t appear to have the Imperial acceptance stamp found on the Red Nines and so is arguably not from the Red Nine contract. If it isn’t from a Red Nine, it would likely be, in collector speak, from a a Pre-war Commercial. Pre-war commercial C96s were generally chambered for the 7.63 Mauser, but factory original 9 mm Luger Pre-war Commercials and such guns usually had 50 – 1000 meter rear sights and did not have the characteristic red nine grip panels.

Regardless of whether the barrel extension is from a Red Nine variation or a Pre-war Commercial variation, it appears to have had the rear sight converted to a fixed rear sight, and the barrel shortened to less than four inches. That’s a common set of alterations for C96s owned by the army/police during the Great War and contined in government service during the Weimar Republic.

The crudeness of the renumbering of the barrel extension suggests it is not a Mauser factory job, nor a German military job. Absence of second proof of converted upper to lower suggests job was not done in Germany. This poses question which we will be unlikely to answer, but should elicit spirited speculation.

I’d love to see a picture of the top of the magazine follower.

Thanks Kyrie,
great summary of the previous posts.

Kyrie, I will get a pic posted as soon as the gun gets out of its 10 California waiting jail term.

Only in California.....

The latest and greatest new law is starting January 1, 2019 - it will be illegal for us "subjects" as they refer to us, to take a shower and do laundry on the same day....I think its a 10 year sentence....and you lose your gun rights.

I had replied to this thread when it was posted but couldn't find Alvin's thread to support...Here is Alvin's 'French Gendarme' C96 that was for sale, with his comments on the big handle/short barrel... :)

http://forum.lugerforum.com/showthread.php?t=34755

It's beginning to look like the French weren't the only Allies who required the Schupo to disable the stock attachments on police pistols before they withdrew their occupation forces (HWIS pp. 129-31 and http://www.historywritinsteel.com/New_Insights.html Item 11). The English may as well in Cologne.

Here are the follower pics

https://i.imgur.com/0Ce3Ama.jpg

https://i.imgur.com/9D0ZBEE.jpg

https://i.imgur.com/y19bGxB.jpg

https://i.imgur.com/DRYIzny.jpg

https://i.imgur.com/aiqfFGq.jpg

I smell what may be an Austrian connection. Suggest a chamber cast.

I'll cast it today. The 9mm cases fit perfectly. Barrel is a bit frosted but rifling is very good but not new. I think this thing will be a good toy. The sear was too short along the horizontal dimension to catch the sear spring so the hammer wouldn't lock back. I set the mig to very low and built up a 0.06" bead and filed it to match dimensions of my other sears. Works great but it needs the face case hardened. It's a numbered piece.

I'm not sure why one would expect it to be anything except 9mm P.:confused:

Nice you can mig.

I’ll go that sentiment one farther and say, “I don’t know why any C96 collector would expect any FrankenMauser to be any given thing at all.” I certainly don’t have any expectations as to this C96.

That said, my main line of speculation (please note word choice “speculation”) is this C96 was made up by someone from the frame salvaged from one Imperial contract “Red Nine” and the barrel/barrel extension salvaged from another Imperial contract “Red Nine”. If this line of speculation turns out to describe the reality then the barrel/barrel extension was originally, and may still be, chambered for the 9x19 Para cartridge.

There are some things about this C96 that suggest to me a connection with Austria during the inter-war years. That in turn leads me to a (secondary) line of speculation that this C96 is not, at present, chambered for the 9x19 Para cartridge. It’s this line of speculation that elicited my request for a photo of the top of the magazine follower. It was that photo of the top of the magazine follower, kindly provided by the C96’s present owner, which made me think it would be wise to get a chamber cast. As the owner has indicated he intends the C96 to be a shooter, it seems to me it would be prudent to confirm by chamber cast that this C96 is in fact chambered for the 9x19 Para.

I have, at this point in time, no expectations as to what a chamber cast would reveal.

I'm still "missing" why an Austrian connection(what are the indications?) would cause you to question the 9mm chambering to be something else.

What other 9mm would be a reasonable speculation if not 9x19?