LugerForum Discussion Forums - View Single Post

drbuster · 08-02-2009, 07:08 PM

Thanks for posting more photos of this interesting luger. I'm not sure they help to answer any questions about where this pistol came from and whether Krieghoff played any role here. On the surface, it is a 1920 commercial luger with "Germany" stamped on the right frame area and an upright C/N commercial proof. It is generally accepted that lugers "reworked" by Krieghoff had lazy C/N proofs but I'm not certain whether any exceptions to this occurred. The toggle is blank which poses many questions. Is there a number stamped under the rear unmarked toggle? Note the H/K marking is also inside the side plate, which adds some credibility to the marking, but as Pete Ebbink stated in an earlier post: Randall Gibson doesn't show or describe this exact marking anywhere in his book. The serial number is right in the middle of the known so-called DWM/Krieghoff "i" series, so if these were sequentially produced and sent to Krieghoff (not sure this happened) then this luger was not early. This will remain an enigma and probably never be answered. As to the late Randall Gibson's alledged acute interest in this luger, this is only conjecture as the poor fellow is not around to ask any longer.

08-02-2009, 07:08 PM	#11
drbuster User Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: San Mateo, California Posts: 1,432 Thanks: 2 Thanked 71 Times in 56 Posts	Thanks for posting more photos of this interesting luger. I'm not sure they help to answer any questions about where this pistol came from and whether Krieghoff played any role here. On the surface, it is a 1920 commercial luger with "Germany" stamped on the right frame area and an upright C/N commercial proof. It is generally accepted that lugers "reworked" by Krieghoff had lazy C/N proofs but I'm not certain whether any exceptions to this occurred. The toggle is blank which poses many questions. Is there a number stamped under the rear unmarked toggle? Note the H/K marking is also inside the side plate, which adds some credibility to the marking, but as Pete Ebbink stated in an earlier post: Randall Gibson doesn't show or describe this exact marking anywhere in his book. The serial number is right in the middle of the known so-called DWM/Krieghoff "i" series, so if these were sequentially produced and sent to Krieghoff (not sure this happened) then this luger was not early. This will remain an enigma and probably never be answered. As to the late Randall Gibson's alledged acute interest in this luger, this is only conjecture as the poor fellow is not around to ask any longer.