View Single Post
Unread 07-13-2020, 12:45 PM   #4
Dwight Gruber
User
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Portland, Oregon
Posts: 3,908
Thanks: 0
Thanked 1,330 Times in 435 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CptCurl View Post
...Was this frame left over from earlier long frame production? I don't think so, and here's why...

...While we are talking about it, please take note that the barrel on my pistol measures 100mm exactly. That's an aberration from the typical, and legally mandated, 98mm and 95mm barrels normally found on the 1920 series pistols...
A better determiner of pre-war vs. post-war frame production is examination of the interior of the back of the frame. In 1914 DWM strengthened the rear frame surface, coincident with the introduction of the LP08. This involved removing less material around the breechblock striking abutment. All DWM frames manufactured after this time, whether military or otherwise, have the strengthened abutment.

How are you measuring your barrel length? The most accurate way is to measure the distance between the muzzle and the breech face. A commonly mistaken method is to insert a rod into the barrel until it reaches the breechblock, and then measure the length of insertion. This method includes the recess of the breech face, and the measurement will be too long. My own pistol mate to yours, sn 2648i, has a barrel length of 100.45mm measured this way; its actual muzzle-to-breechface length is 98.31mm.

If you are not already familiar with it, see this discussion http://forum.lugerforum.com/showthre...ghlight=suffix.

Quote:
Originally Posted by CptCurl View Post
...The pistol is embellished with the Swiss "Cross in Sunburst" over its receiver. I find this very curious because in 1907 the Army had specified that DWM contract pistols should be embellished with the "Cross in Shield" device...Of course, this applied only to the military contracts, but you would think it reflected Swiss sensibilities generally.

Why did DWM revert to the earlier "Cross in Sunburst" device?...l
The Swiss military contract and DWM commercial production were independent of each other. I don't think you can say that commercial production "reverted" to the Swiss receiver cross; rather, they simply didn't make a change. SPECULATION: that DWM found the Swiss cross more useful as a marketing device.

--Dwight
Dwight Gruber is offline   Reply With Quote
The following member says Thank You to Dwight Gruber for your post: