First point-
"Finally, starting on Sturgess P1055 you will see the steady improvement in steel specifications for components used in German Lugers. This is only natural as the science of alloying steel progressed in the period from 1899 through 1945. Here is detail from Sturgess on the Luger Receiver: "
This sounds impressive, but "improvement" only relates to changes in the way the specifications were written, IMO.
We have no idea if the 1942 steel of Mauser was actually different from the "Atlas steel" specified by DWM.
The specific times and temperatures spent to case harden in Durferitt by Mauser may or may not have resulted in different surface hardness than the "lightly casehardened Atlas" steel or the "case hardened"mild steel of 1913.
Any implication of "better" without knowing the composition of the steels mentioned is pure speculation.
Mauser may have heat treated their steel more uniformly in a Durfurrit bath- given the small change noted in time and temperature- from the '34 to '42 specs.- resulting in less batch to batch variation.
Second point:
"The alloy selected and hardening process changes were directly related to improving the Luger's longevity in service. "
I'm not sure how we "know" longevity is the reason.
There is a large body of empirical evidence(lugers that we all collect and own) that indicate, at least to me, that lugers did not wear out- with pre-WWI lugers still being in service post WWII.
It is much more likely any changes to steel had to do with availability of material, cost, and ease of processing.
Third-
Aimco- I have no idea why they fail, I have heard it was due to "galling" of the stainless steel parts rubbing against each other - maybe they were soft. The few I have seen just were not put together well enough to function reliably; they would not fire enough rounds to show up soft steel.
JMHO. Again.
