1907 US Army tests

[Vlim]

Hi,

Just won this little booklet, no idea what date it is from, but it was dead cheap.

It's a German language description of the 1907 US Army tests, including the 45 ACP Luger. Probably a 1960s reprint of a US article.



Will give an update when it arrives.

[John Sabato]

Gerben, Fred Datig devotes an entire chapter in his book, The Luger Pistol, to the U.S. Army Tests of 1907... perhaps this booklet in German is a reprint of that chapter?

[Vlim]

John,

Could be. I'm always on the lookout for vague, early articles and books. Just trying to stretch the time-line a bit further every time. As this one went for a whole Euro, whatever it is, it's a good buy

Guess I'll know more when it arrives.

[Ron Wood]

It will be interesting to see what it says about the .45 Luger. Since I sometimes enjoy instigating a spirited discussion, I think I will once again voice one of my favorite opinions that the .45 shown in this illustration is the actual piece used in the test trials and the grip configuration is quite different than serial #2 from the old Aberman collection and the one in the Norton Gallery.

Great buy for a "whole Euro"! Your literature collection is coming along quite nicely.

[Pete Ebbink]

...and has the same grip angle as the controversial .45 luger carbine, serial # 21...

Regards,

Pete... <img border="0" alt="[typing]" title="" src="graemlins/yltype.gif" />

[John Sabato]

OH BOY! Here we go again Bring it on Gerben... Please provide a good scan of the photo when you get the book.

And Ron Wood... we STILL need a photo essay of a Krausewerk .45 Luger... Are you moved in yet?

[Vlim]

When it gets in, I'll get as much info here as I can.

The 1912/1913 document arrived today, have posted some interesting images in the original thread.

[Ron Wood]

John,
No, not moved in yet. We are hoping for the end of August for a closing date, and then we can start moving, unpacking and landscaping. I will be lucky to have time to do any serious photography before the end of the year.

[John Sabato]

Ron, we will continue to wait on the "serious photography" of your eye candy... the casual stuff just doesn't satisfy us

[Vlim]

Ron,

You got me thinking...
I rotated and slightly enlarged the image. You can clearly see the straight rear-end (where normally the stock lug is placed). It differs from examples I've seen pictured, including those in John Walters books.

Just saw some detail photo's of the 45 carabine, and the grip end appears to be of similar shape, but it lacks the small lug present on the carabine.



This picture shows a detail image of some 45 tails:

Carabine, 2nd Test, German Article

[Ron Wood]

Here is a side-by-side look at #2 and the 1907 Test Luger.

[John Sabato]

Great comparison Ron.

[Johnny C. Kitchens]

Notice the difference in the toggle in front of the front pivot point, also the shape of the trigger guard...

[Vlim]

Quite interesting,

The receiver of the 1907 test appears to be set lower into the frame as the #2 (notice the edge above the sideplate).

It appears that the 'later' 45s were constructed using general P08-pattern designs which were slightly modified, probably to ease production.

The 'early' 45s, (like the 45-carabine?), appear to be of a more experimental, fully handmade design.

This would make the 'later' pattern a good candidate for determining a machine setup for a production line (as for the initially intended 200 test pieces).

IMHO, it makes #2 a very unlikely US-tested candidate, but rather a .45 DWM production test pattern (tool room) version.

At least I believe there is good proof of 2 distinct original .45 luger patterns.

This got me thinking again.
Pictured below are the rough frame forging and the finished P08 frame.



You can see that the forging is a good deal larger than the finished frame would be. To my surprise, it would be feasible to create the 1907 frame with it's 55 degree angle from a P08 forging. Creating the #2 frame from this forging does not appear to be possible...

[Dwight Gruber]

Guys,

This is a very interesting discussion, and I'm very glad it has come up.

--Dwight

[Edward Tinker]

This is what I have been told by several well-known collectors, and thus a SWAG theory;

1. One of the 45 Lugers was left here, the other test gun was destroyed during testing.

2. The other existing 45 Luger was brought to America via a Canadian Officer/Civilian who picked it up from the factory, just after the war, sold it to a well-known collector, who sold it immediatly afterwards to a guy in LA.

So, as Gerben said, one was a test piece, the other was a model that was left at the factory.

3. Being made by hand, a SWAG suggests that the model at the factory was made first, they didn't like the angle, and thus the two test pieces were made and sent to Amerika.

Ed

[Pete Ebbink]

Ed,

I am confused...here (as usual...).

I thought the # 1 luger was the one in the Matthews/Meadows book and had the 55* grip angle. The "back-up" gun at the US Trials was # 2 and had the 60* angle. This speculation always made a sense to me...that is, George Luger would bring two different prototype models in case the Trials shooters did not like the "feel" of one gun in their hands...Luger could pull out a different model if needed...

The un-numbered luger with the 60* angle (the un-numbered gun) may have been the factory leave-behind as folks are speculating and ended up in the Norton Collection...other .45 luger frames (with both types of grip angle styles) remained in Germany to surface later...possibly frame # 21 as well, that was fashioned into a carbine later...

M. Reese mentions holding a # 5 in his book and I keep hearing rumors of a # 14 in Europe, as well...

A. Weiss is quoted as stating there were no more than 6 pieces in .45 caliber...

WILL WE EVER KNOW...???

Regards,

Pete... <img border="0" alt="[typing]" title="" src="graemlins/yltype.gif" />

[Edward Tinker]

No, my information is correct.

.
.
.
.

There is a rumor of another in the US (pistol) and I have heard the French/European rumor also.

Ed

[Pete Ebbink]

Ed,

I am still unclear of your point # 3...it sounds like you are implying/stating the two (2) guns brought over by Luger for the Trials had the same grip angle...(?).

The only 55* grip angle luger in .45 caliber was thought to be the one in the old photograph (that some speculated was taken by the folks conducting the US Trials) and shown in the books by Matthews, Meadows, and finally Reese (1st printing, only). If this # 1 gun was also a 60* grip angled gun, then which gun was photographed in that old photo showing a 55* angle....??? Your premise would lead one to believe that # 1, # 2, and the Norton gun were all 60* angled guns...so what other "model" was left behind...? And who took the photo of the gun with the 55* angle...? and where was it taken...?

Could you fill in the blanks :

1. Serial # 1 - ___* grip angle. Used and destroyed at the Trials. Shown in the Matthews/Meadows photo/books and even in the 1st. edition of the Reese book. (Assuming the photo was taken at time of the Trials...). I thought it had the 55* grip angle.

2. Serial # 2 - 60* grip angle (the old Sid Abermann gun).

3. Un-numbered gun - 60* grip angle (in the Norton Gallery with magazine numbered # 3). This gun is shown in the revised H. Jones book (in my copyo of the 4th. printing in 1975) with its 60* grip angle. Is this the factory leave-behind gun ? Yes ____ No ___

4. "Rumored" Gun # 5 - ____* grip angle (???)

5. "Rumored" gun # 14 - ____* grip angle (???)

6. Luger carbine # 21 (if accepted as real...) - 55* grip angle.

Regards,

Pete... <img border="0" alt="[typing]" title="" src="graemlins/yltype.gif" />

[Edward Tinker]

I have not researched grip angles, sorry I misled you.

I know that the article being written will go into more detail than anything previously written already.

From your #'s

1. Who knows, can't speculate

2. This is the gun that Mr Krause was able to borrow and I am sure the grip angle of the copies he makes are the same as the old Abermann gun.

3. yes

4 & 5 No way to guess unless they turned up, so I think it is useless to speculate unless we can see a photo and believe it is real.

6. Is the angle on carbines the same as other handgun 1906's? If so, then interesting to guess. If the 45 carbine is fake, then why change the angle to a different angle then the other "known" guns.

I am unsure where you get the speculation that the grip angles were different on the two test pieces? <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="wink.gif" />

Ed