Dwight, I'd like to comment on your Post #15 to Ron Wood. Since you didn't make it privately to him by PM, but in the open Forum, I figure you welcome comments.
I agree dated commercial collector designations carry no evolutionary information relative to their official origins. However, I say that is neither necessary nor their purpose. Their purpose, from my point of view, is to provide a shortcut to a mental picture of the subject Luger, that's all. The excess verbiage adds nothing to the conversation that can't added later if called for.
In my 63 years of Luger collecting I have never been mislead, or knew anyone who had, with erroneous date information, e.g. 1902 carbine, 1902 fat barrel, 1914 commercial, '23 commercial. With each one of the examples used I get a full mental picture, the purpose of the conventional use of these shortcuts. Further details can be discussed when all know they're on the "same page".
I see Bill Reupke's 1916 Commercial designation based on the inception of the rebated sear bar as only a further refinement of the 1914 Commercial, itself a further refinement of the 1908 Commercial to indicate a stock lug and hold-open, replicating (a synonym of clone) a 1914 model P.08, except for commercial serial numbering and proofing. I haven't said anything here you don't understand, you just don't agree with any of it, which is ok.
I do want to add, much of your research and opinions have already entered into convention and there will be more to come. Your efforts are much appreciated and I am sure I am joining a huge crowd when I say that. Thanks,
Jack
|