My first Luger
 

I bought my Artillery at a gun show after wanting one for years. I almost bought one at a local gun shop but after describing it and getting some good responses here, I decided that it was not all original and over priced.

The piece I finally got is a 1916 DWM. It has been reblued, but has a nice bore and minimal pitting.....mostly under the grips.

See photos at:
http://gudgeonss567.homestead.com/lUGER.html

Tell me what you think.

(This post was edited by Admin for correct URL-JS)

Sub, whoever did the re-blue SEEMS (from the pics) to have done a decent job. The proofs are still clean and the serial numbers appear to be sharp. It's a "shooter" but a nice one. I'm sure you'll enjoy it.

The pics don't really do it justice. Maybe if I shoot it outside with good lighting....

The bluing is very nice!!

Submarine vet,

I am sorry to be the bearer of bad news for you...

While I agree that you have a very pretty shooter, I am really sorry that I must inform you that the barrel is not original...

Please compare your gun (located in the bottom photo) to the artillery that is not in such good finish (in the top photo)

It appears that your gun has had a new long barrel installed and had a portion of an original artullery barrel shaped and fitted to the top in order to hold the rear sight in the proper position.

The dovetail on a genuine artillery luger is machined directly into the barrel that has been manufactured specifically for an artillery Luger.

I don't know what you paid for your artillery but if originality is important to you, then you have not achieved your purpose... someone has taken advantage of your enthusiasm...

You can see another example of a genuine artillery luger barrel by visiting the old Owner's corner pages and looking at mine... there are also other artillery lugers in the owners corner with which you can compare your gun.

One last thing, the slide on your rear sight has been improperly assembled. The push button should be on the left (see upper photo).



http://boards.rennlist.com/upload/Ar...comparison.jpg

Good write-up John. The very first thing that I noticed was that the rear sight adjustible sight tang bar did not have a serial number on it and neither did the underside of the barrel. I squinted a bit, but it looks like the front sight was not adjustible. The 1916 arty was the last year that the front sight had militarily spec for adjustible front sight.
Submarine Vet, don't feel bad. Lugers are a learning experience. I've been burned a bit over the years too. I am still learning even though I generally try to stick to Imperial Era Lugers. Try not to get impatient. Cash is king and time is in your favor. Nice Lugers are out there but sometimes you have to wait for the right one to come along.
Big Norm [img]frown.gif[/img]

Big Norm, I believe that the fine tune front sight, like the fine tune rear sight, was phased out through the production of 1917. At least that is my impression and hope, or I'm sitting on a couple of 1917 ringers.

I have a 1917 with fine tune front and rear sights also. Doubt that there are that many "ringers" around. The last year for a military spec for adjustable front sight may have been 1916, but evidently there were a lot more barrels made up that spilled over into 1917.

I also notice that this LP-08 does not have the "notch" in the front, top of the receiver. So maybe this was just a P-08 built-up to become a "LP-08"...?

Regards,

Pete... <img src="graemlins/yltype.gif" border="0" alt="[typing]" />

Nice catch Pete, you are correct. I missed that because I was so distracted about the rear site configuration...

This being the case, this gun could not legally be used with a shoulder stock because it is not originally a true artillery model. Use of a shoulder stock would require paying the $200 NFA tax for assembling a short barreled rifle (SBR).

All that said. It is still a very nice looking Luger long barreled shooter... I would love to know how well it shoots Submarine Vet...

Pete et al, it is almost certainly one of the commercial 1920's barrels marketed by Pacific Arms as well as others. I have an original PA brochure which features just such a barrel as well as whole pistols. I also have a 1920's 16" so called artillery that was sold by PA with exactly the same barrel.

Pete you may recall seeing my brochure in Tulsa.

I have 1917 artillery with no Suffix that has fine tuned front and rear sights.
Lonnie

For the record, 1917 Artillery 2525k, fine-tune rear/standard front.

--Dwight

Hey guys teach me something.

Is there a fine tune and a not fine tune?

My arty is a poor example, someone other than Thor years ago buffed it bad and the markings are not as clear as they should be.

(Dwight!! Sorry I didn't make it to Portland. Wanted to go, have to put up christmas lights, tree, etc., I think I would rather visit and see the gun show... But oh well! [img]smile.gif[/img] )

Three 1917's; 6705f rear only, 3980g rear only, 6360l neither. I have also had 1917's with both.

How about those who have LP08's with numbered matching stocks, do the stock iron numbers include the suffix?

Fine-tune LP-08 sights have micrometer-style adjustments, the little discs (screw-heads) with two holes in them which the adjustment tool engages in order to turn them. The micrometer adjustment was phased out during 1917, apparently as parts stock was exhausted.

http://boards.rennlist.com/upload/FineTune.jpg

Ed, yeah, would have been fun, but 'tis the season. Oh well, there's always another gun show...

--Dwight

Hello Dwight,

Great photos...thanks for taking the time to post them.

Hello George,

Yes, I do remember your PA catalogue...

I do have this question : In Submarine Vet's photo, it looks like an old LP-08 rear sight and portion of the barrel mount was cut off and then brazed/soldered to the new PA barrel... Is this what I am seeing ...?

Regards,

Pete... <img src="graemlins/yltype.gif" border="0" alt="[typing]" />

George and Ron,
yes, there are 1917 LP-08's with front and rear adjustible sights.

"The sights of most guns PRIOR TO 1917 could be adjusted with set screws and capstan..."
The Luger Book By John Walter page 151

"Fine-tuned feature eliminated first on the front and then on the rear sight toward the end of 1917 production."
"Imperial Lugers and Their Accessories" by Jan Stills page 93

I thought that I had read someplace that the adjustible sights were removed from specifications after 1916. Maybe I assumed too much from Walters book. When I first started collecting, I took him as the final word. His book is good for small details. I had always thought that maybe the adjustible sights on the 1917 were just inventory reduction. So many lives were lost in the first two years of the war that maybe strict adherance to detail of specifications in production was not great.

I did learn something though. I never realized, until now, that the rear sight had the adjustment removed in later years. Since so many of my artillery lugers had it that I never thought much about looking for it. My 1918 has the rear adjustment gone and there is a serial number there instead.
Big Norm

Thanks guys for your comments and to John Sabato for enlightening me on my "find". It was a let down at first, but I learned a lot and even more questions were raised......

Were 8" barrels produced without the machined sight boss? George Anderson mentions Pacific Arms producing them, but I can't find anything more on Pacific Arms.

This barrel has a correct proof mark on the right side and the bore size and correct suffix on the bottom. Do barrels always have a S/N?

I noticed that the sight boss/mount has some pitting on the left outside rear surface. Does this mean that it is relatively old? On the flat inside the dovetail are three letters stamped just forward of the hole for the set screw. They are C, then 1 (slightly lower) and 7 (at same level as C.

There are two vertical scribed marks on the barrel, one at each of the rear corners of the boss/mount, resembling witness marks.

Finally, as this isn't enough, there are other stampings that I haven't seen mentioned on this forum....but I'll post those later. Getting tired!

<img src="graemlins/c.gif" border="0" alt="[ouch]" /> Ron