Hi, Ron,
Thanks for the tip. I was not a member at the time and had not seen that. I will stand by the process I described.
Despite reams of paper on the precision of the German arms industry, they were really not any more precise than anyone else. (Look at the variation on the plug gauge bore diameter readings of Luger barrels.) Since absolute parts precision was not possible, selective fitting was used, as it was used by US arms makers as well, and the parts numbered.
The Luger was, in fact, fully assembled and parts fitted and numbered, then taken apart for final finish and bluing, and heat treatment of some parts. (The barrel was NOT removed.) Then it was reassembled. That was the reason for the number, to make sure fitted parts stayed together.
They did the same thing with the K.98k, with the result that rifle production was slow and inefficient by US standards.
The statement that the draw line was used in determining the position of the front sight is true, but the machining of the front sight was done as part of barrel making, not after assembly. In every arms factory in the world, barrel production was an independent process, with barrels produced separately from receivers, and they did not get together until they were put into the sub assembly. When a Luger barrel was made, there was no way of knowing whether it would be installed in a pistol or set aside as a spare. It was finish machined in the white, then put in a rack to be taken to the assembly benches.
If a pistol shows draw lines that don't line up (within a tiny margin of error - the match was done by eye) then the front sight should not line up either. A slight misalignment of the sight is easy to overlook, but I would bet on the draw line being right. If in doubt, what I do is to clamp the receiver (without the grip frame) on a steel flat, then lay a 12" steel straight edge across the sight at right angles to the barrel. This will show any sight misalignment, and it can be corrected easily by turning the barrel in or out a tiny bit.
Jim
|