LugerForum Discussion Forums - View Single Post

Vlim · 11-21-2005, 08:35 AM

Ron,

Aha. That makes sense. The only other way a 'st Etienne' marked 1903 would make sense is that they sold them after 1909, which according to your 1903 at least, didn't happen.

Apart from 'Manufacture Francaise' selling the 1906 patter commercially, there is one other good reason for a 'French' luger to exist. This mainly has to do with French patent laws, which dicitated that only designs could be patented in France if they were actually built there.

Maxim, for example, had a machinegun built by a French company, so he could have the design protected over there (mentioned in his autobiography). I'm pretty sure DWM would have done the same thing with the Luger design.

I'm still confident, however, that 1903 Lugers with a French 'charge' marking should not have a 'St. Etienne' marking.

11-21-2005, 08:35 AM	#18
Vlim Moderator Lifetime LugerForum Patron Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: Europe Posts: 5,053 Thanks: 1,036 Thanked 3,990 Times in 1,205 Posts	Ron, Aha. That makes sense. The only other way a 'st Etienne' marked 1903 would make sense is that they sold them after 1909, which according to your 1903 at least, didn't happen. Apart from 'Manufacture Francaise' selling the 1906 patter commercially, there is one other good reason for a 'French' luger to exist. This mainly has to do with French patent laws, which dicitated that only designs could be patented in France if they were actually built there. Maxim, for example, had a machinegun built by a French company, so he could have the design protected over there (mentioned in his autobiography). I'm pretty sure DWM would have done the same thing with the Luger design. I'm still confident, however, that 1903 Lugers with a French 'charge' marking should not have a 'St. Etienne' marking.