Sorry Flug, we gave short answers because that is what we thought you were looking for;
</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana,Tahoma,Arial,Helvetica,Geneva">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana,Tahoma,Arial,Helvetica,Geneva">Why do you think BYF produced some lugers with the black bakelite parts and black finish?</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana,Tahoma,Arial,Helvetica,Geneva">From what I understand the old thoughts on this was that they were made for SS or another organization, but, now most collectors believe that they were simply a change in how Lugers were manufactured and not a significant gun.
New theories are always good, and if you have factual basis, we are more than willing to listen
I too believe that the Germans design well, and think about what each aspect of the manufacturing plan is. But I have also seen many contradictory aspects in collecting Lugers, and I am starting to believe that with so many years, variations and manufacturers, that American collectors simply like to figure there is more to the story than there really is. During war, you make the gun as well as you can and sometimes there are oddities.
A good example of oddities that people in America believe or try very hard to match up is Rigs. (There is the interesting thread recently on matching rigs, which was well written). Guns and holsters
might match in years, but why
would they on purpose? When a gun was issued, they were issued a holster, why would they check to make sure the year was the same? They wouldnâ??t. it simply comes down that most rigs would have years close to the same year of holster, but many, many lugers from WW1 were still in service in WW2 and they very well could have had several holsters over the years. This is just an example that I have noticed how collectors try to match everything up, and it probably was only luck that a holster and a gun matched.
Ed