If there is "nothing wrong" with the other makers of lugers, then Mauser or Swiss use of "different" steel is irrelevant.
Personally I think Mauser wrote different specifications, using the language of the day- rather than the older terms used earlier by others. These "sound" more sophisticated, but in reality are essentially the same specs used before.
The Swiss actually "modified/simplified/cheapened" several parts of the luger to make it easier and less expensive to make. these parts were the side plate, safety lever and its attachment, and the grip safety itself. They did improve the extractor to make it stronger. They also changed the profile of the front strap of the frame to reduce mfg. time- and at the same time gave it an ugly proflie instead of a classic, flowing style. Again JMO.
As far as tolerances go, I fail to see how any tighter tolerances(than DWM, et al.) could be achieved and still result in a functioning pistol.
Marc and I see this from two entirely different points, I see quality as "suitability for use", anything more or extra adds un-necessary expense- and the luger was expensive enough already.
All of course being JMHO.
