Ron,
I do not see the reason for you to be ‘ticked off’ when I am writing a commentary about the early Lugers which we share a common interest. I did not insult you (yes, I do utterly hate Geoff), but I do differ on some of the positions that you may advocate which have been mentioned in Geoff’s article. I never want to compare myself with Geoff, and his research on the early Swiss Lugers is more like a comic book instead of a scholar. Furthermore, his unscrupulous ‘Anglo-Latino’ ties are shocking indeed and some of this shady activity goes back to the early 1990’s. If you are unaware, traces of his involvement in fake guns have recently reappeared, so before he had condemned any pistol and never makes a rightful retraction, he should look at himself in the mirror. You seem to become sensitive when other people try to question your views and maybe old age is creeping up on you (just teasing). I would like to correct you that I am NOT attempting to paint you with the same brush that I am using on Geoff, but I do not see how you may give some benefit to his story that a handful of M1899 pistols were modified, renumbered and afterwards delivered 18 months later to the UK. Do you really give any weight to such fiction?
Before I specifically answer some of your remarks/comments, I would first like to highlight some undisputed facts which are very important in understanding German heritage and manufacturing:
- The Loewe family was very powerful financially and politically, plus they owned the DWM factory, the Mauser factory and a large share of the FN factory;
- The DWM factory (including the Mauser factory) made their own machine tools and equipment for manufacturing various parts of pistols and rifles. I recently read an engineering report set (published in German, English, French and Spanish) about the Mauser factory which was distributed to various libraries including shipyards and also to the main German passenger cruise ships. This report gave a fantastic account on Paul and Wilhelm Mauser including the organized working environment for the employees at the factory without allowing the highest level of quality to be compromised. It went to further to explain how the German workers were so proud of their heritage, family, loyalty, standards, discipline and skills, proving that the DWM factory would have been exactly the same or better;
- The work force was highly skilled and quality control was impeccable, especially for a Luger pistol which was going to have a ‘GL’ hallmark. If there is any confusion about German standards around that period, maybe we should try imagining ourselves working in a German factory such as DWM or Mauser – its conditions functioned like a Rolex watch with precision. The slightest visible error/flaw on a special firearm would have resulted in a rejection.
Although Geoff has a PhD in physics, writes the Queens English as well as having a large collection which he simply bought with his wealth, these variables are still not enough to generate an accurate knowledge base or reputation to share with other collectors, and I wonder why many collectors still believe his bull****? I suppose that their connection with a man having a huge collection might give them more recognition in the collectors’ society – wrong.
I would like to explain to you why I have compelling arguments that the twenty pistols serial #10-#30 would have NOT been collected up in various areas of Switzerland and returned to the DWM factory for refurbishment and modification. Firstly, why waste time and money to fetch twenty pistols that were probably heavily used in various tests and afterwards consider them for gifts or further testing in another country as refurbished pistols?
Secondly, these twenty M1899 pistols (plus ammunition) were
PURCHASED by the Swiss Government, and how could ten refurbished pistols be considered as a ‘gift’ (to the Swiss Commission after the M1899 trials) if they were originally purchased from DWM after some M1898 Luger pistols won the trials of 1898 and DWM also received a prize of SF 5,000? “You want to give me my pistols as a gift which I bought?” – Come on, I have never read such nonsense! This matter would have been seen as a joke by the Swiss Commission. It would show more confidence and assurance for a company (DWM) to give new pistols to a commission instead of used-refurbished pistols, otherwise, the whole corporate objective of meeting certain quality standards would be completely diluted. In my opinion, the newly assembled pistols for the British where the Swiss cross still appears on the chamber was to demonstrate that the Swiss Government were in the process of adopting the Luger pistol.
Thirdly, it would be a big embarrassment to Mr. Loewe and his prestigious German factory to lower their honor and standards by supplying refurbished pistols when trying to obtain a significant contract for the Swiss Army. Obviously, it would be cheaper to assemble new pistols with parts in inventory which have been improved and/or reinforced – I have observed this occurrence in some early ‘System Mauser’ pistols and there would be no major difference in the manufacturing process with parts for early Luger pistols. I do not recall the Mauser factory never having to chase down pistols in different regions of Germany during the German (cavalry) trials of 1898 or shortly afterwards from a foreign country (Turkey) for delivery to another country!
My various explanations makes me believe that pistol #21 is a true M1899 delivered for the Swiss Trials of 1899, and my M1900 pistol serial #13 (with a couple of improvements) is likely one of the 10 or 20 ‘GL’ presentation pistols given to each member of the Swiss Commission at the end of the trials. Furthermore, I cannot believe that only 40 pistols in total would have been made between 1898 and the first quarter of 1901 (Swiss – Dutch – British trails) when the Mauser factory was able to make over a thousand C96 pistols for commercial sales, and 460 Large Ring C96 pistols for the two German Army Tests of July 1898 and January 1899. It is also possible that serial #13 in my collection is the only surviving example which was a gift and the other pistols have not yet surfaced. By the way, a similar pattern occurred in the Mauser factory where ‘System Mauser’ cutaways (probably dealer samples) were recorded in a separate serial range. I do not believe that a M1899 pistol (such as #21 with an early thin trigger) would be left alone and given as a gift after the Swiss Commission made a complaint against this type of trigger. (If you refer to the image in the Kessler auction catalog, you made a mistake in mentioning that serial #21 (M1899) has been retrofitted with a standard trigger at the DWM factory – nope, it still has the early thin preproduction trigger. In addition, serial #19 is slightly modified by a Swiss Arsenal having a replaced barrel and a thicker extractor). It is possible that that pistol serial #21 being in very good condition was lucky to escape the harsh conditions of a trial, instead somebody decided to save this pistol and only give it a gentle examination like serial #5 (M1898). I have had the opportunity to examine twice serial #5 in my hands and it is possible that the rear toggle link (square) cracked at the narrow corner during the 1898 trials which was replaced by a new part (no ‘GL’ present) where the ‘belly’ was made flat to help reduce the weight of the pistol. The pistol did not have to go back to the DWM factory to replace this part, whereas suggestions were being noted for changes/modifications to pistol serial #6 which did go back to the DWM factory for improvements, but it was not tested – probably only inspected for its improvements until the twenty M1899 pistols would arrive for the second trial.
Lastly, if the indexing dot is a point that was used/created during the design of the Swiss cross on the M1899 pistols,
then it should appear pronounced on every single pistol made between serial #10-#30 which is not the case. I do not remember seeing an indexing dot on serial #10 (V1) when I had examined it in my hands (the upper receiver is correct), nor does my M1900 pre-production Luger serial #13 have a dot. Furthermore, if you observe the image of pistol serial #19 in Reinhardt’s book, it does not have an indexing dot in the center of the cross and I guess that we all agree that this particular pistol is original except for the replaced barrel. I suppose that just because serial #21 (M1899) and #26 (M1900) have an indexing dot automatically means that all the M1899 pistols should have the same dot in the same exact place. Probably Geoff got a hard-on while writing his Swiss-Anglo connection story without his intelligence realizing that it would end up in an anti-climax. Frankly, I do not accept a national crest being defaced on a ‘GL’ pistol – it is tacky workmanship, and a prestigious German factory would have not allowed this to happen. If I was in charge of quality control at the DWM factory, I would have asked “what is this damn ugly dot doing in the middle of a national symbol?”
Ron, I enjoy exchanging views/opinions with you, however, I reckon that your consideration of other peoples opinions that makes no valid sense based on old German heritage sometimes falls outside of being realistic. I wish that my German language was better, but even with my limited German, I am learning everyday what the Germans stood for during the imperial era and I am also proud of this quality.
Cheers,
Albert