View Single Post
Unread 11-19-2003, 10:39 PM   #34
Dwight Gruber
User
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Portland, Oregon
Posts: 3,908
Thanks: 0
Thanked 1,330 Times in 435 Posts
Post

Ed,

As I understand it, the 1910 Instructions appertain to -all- P-08 procured by the army. Erfurt, being a Government armory, followed the instructions to the letter. Simpson followed suit. DWM (and Mauser) did not bother with inspector's marks. Educated speculation has it that, as private companies, they did not feel bound by this requirement. Why, and why the Army inspectors permitted this deviation, is unknown.

DWM (and Mauser) did, it seems, hew closely to the serial# requirements. One could wonder if this was because of the functionality aspects of matching parts.

Howard,

Your determination to invest only in detail matching guns--grips (and magazines??) included--is certainly laudable. I agree that, until armorer/armory practices are clearly understood, a Luger advertised as an "armory rework" is suspicious.

That being said, how do you feel about Vono, Frankenschloss, or HZa marked Lugers?

--Dwight
Dwight Gruber is offline   Reply With Quote