LugerForum Discussion Forums - View Single Post

John D. · 08-03-2003, 10:56 PM

Hi Folks....

OK - seems like Pete is the only one to take up the challenge - and what a terrific job..!! Pete - if you will e-mail me your address - I'll fire off that commercial mag to you.....

First things first. This seller is *excellent* - and a terrificly honest individual. Based on several conversations, this piece is indeed what I suspected - a post-war HK. These are very diffent then "parts guns" - and actually, are a very collectible HK variation to some of us.

Now - Pete, even though you missed the big question of "what would you ask the seller to do?"

The answer is really simple - remove the right grip and look for any stamps. The seller was more then the accomodating - and yes, there is a "7" stamped there. So - what does "7" mean?

Gibson touches on it - but my theory is that, based on the post-wars I have in my collection and those I have authenticated - a frame marked "7" was further into the assembly stage then a "star" rejected frame. On this piece - I do believe that the cannon, reciever and frame were assembled at the time of the major 1936 production, but was "set aside" to either be re-worked or turned into a commercial with a "Star or a" stamp. After the factory was "liberated", this piece was most likelyassembled by the few HK employees that were permitted to finish HK Lugers. Following, I also have several post-war production HKs of this same variation in my collection - 3 of the 4 have the same "7".

As well - I'll be writing a report for the current seller with quite a bit of detail, but in brief - here are some summary observations:

- The trigger does NOT match the outline of the trigger guard. The shoe is correct, however. HK had very good fitting matches on the guard to the trigger top 1/3. My guess is, on a post-war HK such as this, the trigger is stamped to match the frame. I believe that this is the case on this HK;

- The extractor is ill-fitted - correct for an HK postwar, as being assembled from the factory parts which included HK, Simson, DWM, Erfurt, etc.

- The rear toggle appears to be DWM â?? not HK â?? BUT â?? it should have a LWaA2 proof on the underside if taken in at the HK factory and assembled later with the remaining links. This one does, and again is â??correctâ? for a post war;

Now for the â??obvious stuffâ?.

- Look at the trigger bar. Closely. It is â??strawedâ?. As well, the take down is, indeed Simson, not HK. Both are correct for a post war.

- The takedown â??shouldâ? have the last 2 digets of the frame serial number stamped inside on the relieved portion â?? and this one does as well;

- The sideplate is absolutely correct for a post war. Again â?? the outside should be stamped with the last 2 digets, as this is, the inside can be stamped with any number. This follows suit to post-war HK. The trigger lever mounted in the sideplate can also be â??proofedâ? or not proofed, but this one is â??proofedâ? correctly;

- The barrel. You focused on the â??1â?. Thatâ??s not really where I wanted your attention

I wanted you to focus on the â??8â? and the â??8â?. Iâ??m looking for the â?? , â??, but it may not have been â??struckâ? on the dies. Oh â?? and the LWAa2 proof is correct â?? both in placement and era die;

- The grips are correct for a post war â?? but are out of era for an issued HK. They are excellent examples of the fine checkered RITZMANN grips. However, there should be a â??scratched starâ? on one of the grip panels designating that the grips are fitted to a â??7â? or â??Starâ? frame. After speaking with the seller, this is the case on this firearm â?? which would make them correct;

- Frame polish on the rails. If this was fitted as a production HK, the frame/cannon rails should be â??polishedâ?. When contacting the seller, one should also ask if this is the case. On this example, the answer is no â?? they are not polished â?? as is correct on a post-war HK.

Ummmm - I could go on - but you get the idea. As well - the seller is a terrific person - and I envy the next owner of this piece.

Anyway - great job, Pete!!! No - it's not a PX or G.I "parts gun" - but rather a post war HK production, which is somewhat a rarer variation which should NOT include a "P" prefix and is very different then a PX HK or a GI "parts gun".

08-03-2003, 10:56 PM	#23
John D. Administrator & Site Owner LugerForum Patron Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: A Little NE of Somewhere... Posts: 2,651 Thanks: 471 Thanked 513 Times in 127 Posts	Hi Folks.... OK - seems like Pete is the only one to take up the challenge - and what a terrific job..!! Pete - if you will e-mail me your address - I'll fire off that commercial mag to you..... First things first. This seller is excellent - and a terrificly honest individual. Based on several conversations, this piece is indeed what I suspected - a post-war HK. These are very diffent then "parts guns" - and actually, are a very collectible HK variation to some of us. Now - Pete, even though you missed the big question of "what would you ask the seller to do?" The answer is really simple - remove the right grip and look for any stamps. The seller was more then the accomodating - and yes, there is a "7" stamped there. So - what does "7" mean? Gibson touches on it - but my theory is that, based on the post-wars I have in my collection and those I have authenticated - a frame marked "7" was further into the assembly stage then a "star" rejected frame. On this piece - I do believe that the cannon, reciever and frame were assembled at the time of the major 1936 production, but was "set aside" to either be re-worked or turned into a commercial with a "Star or a" stamp. After the factory was "liberated", this piece was most likelyassembled by the few HK employees that were permitted to finish HK Lugers. Following, I also have several post-war production HKs of this same variation in my collection - 3 of the 4 have the same "7". As well - I'll be writing a report for the current seller with quite a bit of detail, but in brief - here are some summary observations: - The trigger does NOT match the outline of the trigger guard. The shoe is correct, however. HK had very good fitting matches on the guard to the trigger top 1/3. My guess is, on a post-war HK such as this, the trigger is stamped to match the frame. I believe that this is the case on this HK; - The extractor is ill-fitted - correct for an HK postwar, as being assembled from the factory parts which included HK, Simson, DWM, Erfurt, etc. - The rear toggle appears to be DWM â?? not HK â?? BUT â?? it should have a LWaA2 proof on the underside if taken in at the HK factory and assembled later with the remaining links. This one does, and again is â??correctâ? for a post war; Now for the â??obvious stuffâ?. - Look at the trigger bar. Closely. It is â??strawedâ?. As well, the take down is, indeed Simson, not HK. Both are correct for a post war. - The takedown â??shouldâ? have the last 2 digets of the frame serial number stamped inside on the relieved portion â?? and this one does as well; - The sideplate is absolutely correct for a post war. Again â?? the outside should be stamped with the last 2 digets, as this is, the inside can be stamped with any number. This follows suit to post-war HK. The trigger lever mounted in the sideplate can also be â??proofedâ? or not proofed, but this one is â??proofedâ? correctly; - The barrel. You focused on the â??1â?. Thatâ??s not really where I wanted your attention I wanted you to focus on the â??8â? and the â??8â?. Iâ??m looking for the â?? , â??, but it may not have been â??struckâ? on the dies. Oh â?? and the LWAa2 proof is correct â?? both in placement and era die; - The grips are correct for a post war â?? but are out of era for an issued HK. They are excellent examples of the fine checkered RITZMANN grips. However, there should be a â??scratched starâ? on one of the grip panels designating that the grips are fitted to a â??7â? or â??Starâ? frame. After speaking with the seller, this is the case on this firearm â?? which would make them correct; - Frame polish on the rails. If this was fitted as a production HK, the frame/cannon rails should be â??polishedâ?. When contacting the seller, one should also ask if this is the case. On this example, the answer is no â?? they are not polished â?? as is correct on a post-war HK. Ummmm - I could go on - but you get the idea. As well - the seller is a terrific person - and I envy the next owner of this piece. Anyway - great job, Pete!!! No - it's not a PX or G.I "parts gun" - but rather a post war HK production, which is somewhat a rarer variation which should NOT include a "P" prefix and is very different then a PX HK or a GI "parts gun".