1914 Erfurt dilemma II

drbuster · 08-11-2002, 05:18 PM

It is to be recalled that Jan Still's Imperial Lugers maintains that 1914 4" P.08's were few in number (7000) and were in the "ns", "a". and "b" suffix blocks. My previous post thread was to explain my apparently original matched 1914 #9912 "q" and one recently sold by Ralph #5523"r". A possible explanation now emerges: On page 147 of John Walter's "The Luger Story" (2001 edition), he states: "A mystery is presented by the absence of properly authenticated Erfurt-made Pistolen 1908 dating from 1915, though the customary handful of guns with mismatched parts has been found. The factory may not have made pistols in 1915 (which is feasible, if unlikely); or, alternatively, the guns delivered in 1915 were actually dated 1914. Analyzing serial numbers seems to show a tremendous increase in output in 1914-so did the factory simply make more basic components than could be assembled, proved and finished in the relevant year?" If all this is true, My Erfurt "q" and the other one "r" were indeed made in 1915 and dated 1914. Thus Jan Still is absolutely correct in his book. I will still be bringing the piece to Reno! [img]tongue.gif[/img]

Garfield · 08-11-2002, 05:49 PM

Herbert:

You need to come up with an explanation as to where approx 150,000 (suffix c through q), 1914 dated lugers, went or are. If you could then your theory might begin to sound credible. So far all you can account for is two. Sorry, but the figures just don't support your theory.

Herb · 08-11-2002, 05:57 PM

Herb don't hold me to this as my memory is failing me in my older years but I seem to recall somewhere in the cobwebs that the dating of Lugers was not necessarily done in the year they were actually manufactured, but that the dates signified the year that the particular firm recieved the contract for a specified run of Lugers. Therefore a firm, Erfurt, recieves a contract for 1000 pieces in mid to late 1914 and the manufacturing actually carried over into 1915 before that contract was fulfilled, so the '1915' Erfurts were still marked 1914 per contract. I cannot recall which companys' did this, or if ANY actually did. If there is any accuracy this, it would explain a few things. Sure wish I could remember where I read this. Maybe in my dreams. <img src="graemlins/sleep.gif" border="0" alt="[sleep]" />

Garfield · 08-11-2002, 06:42 PM

Herb:

I believe that you are confusing lugers produced to fill commercial contracts with lugers produced for the military. Erfurt was a govt owned emtity which produced arms and munitions for the military; they did not, to my knowledge, produce lugers for the commercial market.

Herb · 08-11-2002, 07:05 PM

Garfield, I just used Erfurt as an example, very well DWM or Mauser or others would have done as an example. I do note that in The Luger Handbook, Davis refers to the 1908 military Luger as bearing either the DWM or Erfurt toggle stamping. He shows some 'history' and says they are also known as the '1908 commercial and military' and differ only in the placement of the serial numbers. Hard to tell if Erfurt produced any of them (commercials) from his observations.

drbuster · 08-11-2002, 07:22 PM

Garfield is , of course, absolutely right. Where are the 150,000 or so "c" - "q" Erfurts? I have been told that perhaps Erfurt 1914 Lange pistols made up the difference, BUT all 1914 langes are suffixed in the "ns", "a" and "b" series as far as I can tell. This is still a mystery. Perhaps folks at the Reno show will help or just confuse me more. [img]frown.gif[/img]

Johnny Peppers · 08-11-2002, 08:27 PM

Mr. Fisher,
The amount of confusion will probably depend upon whether they are buying or selling.

Jan C Still · 08-11-2002, 09:14 PM

Herb and Herb F.
Please read p. 15, p. 29 and p. 78 of Imperial Lugers. This may help you understand why your suggestions of 1914 dated Erfurt Luger production (with a releaved sear bar) during 1915 is very unlikley.

The imformation from the Arron Davis book as you quote it, is so confusing as to be worthless.

Imperial German military Lugers were dated the year they were fabricated. Its a requirement of the contract (see p. 29 and p. 78 of Imperial Lugers). However, this must have caused some hardship with production at the years end. Only two Imperial Lugers are reported with the extra fabrication date required of earlier dated receivers (see p 78).

During The Nazi Era there are some minor exceptions, as some lugers were assembled from parts remaining near the end of Mauser Luger production.

I am currently revising Volume I and any factual or empirical data to support your speculation would be most appreciated.
Jan

drbuster · 08-11-2002, 09:25 PM

Dear Jan, MUCH APPRECIATE your posting. I checked those pages you mentioned--message understood. I will let you know by posting on the Forum any useful or informative feedback I get at Reno. I certainly will be one of many buyers of your revision.

Lonnie Zimmerman · 08-12-2002, 02:05 AM

Jan; your remark about the Davis book, in my opinion, was kind!!
Lonnie

Garfield · 08-12-2002, 02:34 AM

Lonnie:

Regarding the Davis' book, I couldn't agree with you more. Some time ago, it was being offered free as a promo for buying something else. One person commented that the only good thing about the book was that it was free.

Good Hunting,

Orv Reichert · 08-12-2002, 11:27 AM

Re Davis' book....

AMEN!!

Orv Reichert

08-11-2002, 05:18 PM	#1
drbuster User Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: San Mateo, California Posts: 1,432 Thanks: 2 Thanked 71 Times in 56 Posts	1914 Erfurt dilemma II It is to be recalled that Jan Still's Imperial Lugers maintains that 1914 4" P.08's were few in number (7000) and were in the "ns", "a". and "b" suffix blocks. My previous post thread was to explain my apparently original matched 1914 #9912 "q" and one recently sold by Ralph #5523"r". A possible explanation now emerges: On page 147 of John Walter's "The Luger Story" (2001 edition), he states: "A mystery is presented by the absence of properly authenticated Erfurt-made Pistolen 1908 dating from 1915, though the customary handful of guns with mismatched parts has been found. The factory may not have made pistols in 1915 (which is feasible, if unlikely); or, alternatively, the guns delivered in 1915 were actually dated 1914. Analyzing serial numbers seems to show a tremendous increase in output in 1914-so did the factory simply make more basic components than could be assembled, proved and finished in the relevant year?" If all this is true, My Erfurt "q" and the other one "r" were indeed made in 1915 and dated 1914. Thus Jan Still is absolutely correct in his book. I will still be bringing the piece to Reno! [img]tongue.gif[/img]

08-11-2002, 05:57 PM	#3
Herb User Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Utah, in the land of the Sleeping Rainbow Posts: 1,457 Thanks: 0 Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post	Herb don't hold me to this as my memory is failing me in my older years but I seem to recall somewhere in the cobwebs that the dating of Lugers was not necessarily done in the year they were actually manufactured, but that the dates signified the year that the particular firm recieved the contract for a specified run of Lugers. Therefore a firm, Erfurt, recieves a contract for 1000 pieces in mid to late 1914 and the manufacturing actually carried over into 1915 before that contract was fulfilled, so the '1915' Erfurts were still marked 1914 per contract. I cannot recall which companys' did this, or if ANY actually did. If there is any accuracy this, it would explain a few things. Sure wish I could remember where I read this. Maybe in my dreams. <img src="graemlins/sleep.gif" border="0" alt="[sleep]" /> __________________ Utah, where gun control means a steady trigger pull

08-12-2002, 02:05 AM	#10
Lonnie Zimmerman User Join Date: Jun 2002 Posts: 523 Thanks: 0 Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post	Jan; your remark about the Davis book, in my opinion, was kind!! Lonnie __________________ Lonnie Zimmerman

08-12-2002, 11:27 AM	#12
Orv Reichert RIP Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: SW Washington State Posts: 339 Thanks: 0 Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts	Re Davis' book.... AMEN!! Orv Reichert __________________ ORVEL L. "ORV" REICHERT

08-11-2002, 05:49 PM	#2
Garfield User Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: A little SE of Nome Posts: 239 Thanks: 0 Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts	Herbert: You need to come up with an explanation as to where approx 150,000 (suffix c through q), 1914 dated lugers, went or are. If you could then your theory might begin to sound credible. So far all you can account for is two. Sorry, but the figures just don't support your theory.

08-11-2002, 06:42 PM	#4
Garfield User Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: A little SE of Nome Posts: 239 Thanks: 0 Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts	Herb: I believe that you are confusing lugers produced to fill commercial contracts with lugers produced for the military. Erfurt was a govt owned emtity which produced arms and munitions for the military; they did not, to my knowledge, produce lugers for the commercial market.

08-11-2002, 07:05 PM	#5
Herb User Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Utah, in the land of the Sleeping Rainbow Posts: 1,457 Thanks: 0 Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post	Garfield, I just used Erfurt as an example, very well DWM or Mauser or others would have done as an example. I do note that in The Luger Handbook, Davis refers to the 1908 military Luger as bearing either the DWM or Erfurt toggle stamping. He shows some 'history' and says they are also known as the '1908 commercial and military' and differ only in the placement of the serial numbers. Hard to tell if Erfurt produced any of them (commercials) from his observations. __________________ Utah, where gun control means a steady trigger pull

08-11-2002, 07:22 PM	#6
drbuster User Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: San Mateo, California Posts: 1,432 Thanks: 2 Thanked 71 Times in 56 Posts	Garfield is , of course, absolutely right. Where are the 150,000 or so "c" - "q" Erfurts? I have been told that perhaps Erfurt 1914 Lange pistols made up the difference, BUT all 1914 langes are suffixed in the "ns", "a" and "b" series as far as I can tell. This is still a mystery. Perhaps folks at the Reno show will help or just confuse me more. [img]frown.gif[/img]

08-11-2002, 08:27 PM	#7
Johnny Peppers User Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Calion, Arkansas Posts: 1,042 Thanks: 0 Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post	Mr. Fisher, The amount of confusion will probably depend upon whether they are buying or selling.

08-11-2002, 09:14 PM	#8
Jan C Still User Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Box 240188, Douglas, Alaska, 99824 Posts: 463 Thanks: 0 Thanked 52 Times in 32 Posts	Herb and Herb F. Please read p. 15, p. 29 and p. 78 of Imperial Lugers. This may help you understand why your suggestions of 1914 dated Erfurt Luger production (with a releaved sear bar) during 1915 is very unlikley. The imformation from the Arron Davis book as you quote it, is so confusing as to be worthless. Imperial German military Lugers were dated the year they were fabricated. Its a requirement of the contract (see p. 29 and p. 78 of Imperial Lugers). However, this must have caused some hardship with production at the years end. Only two Imperial Lugers are reported with the extra fabrication date required of earlier dated receivers (see p 78). During The Nazi Era there are some minor exceptions, as some lugers were assembled from parts remaining near the end of Mauser Luger production. I am currently revising Volume I and any factual or empirical data to support your speculation would be most appreciated. Jan

08-11-2002, 09:25 PM	#9
drbuster User Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: San Mateo, California Posts: 1,432 Thanks: 2 Thanked 71 Times in 56 Posts	Dear Jan, MUCH APPRECIATE your posting. I checked those pages you mentioned--message understood. I will let you know by posting on the Forum any useful or informative feedback I get at Reno. I certainly will be one of many buyers of your revision.

08-12-2002, 02:34 AM	#11
Garfield User Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: A little SE of Nome Posts: 239 Thanks: 0 Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts	Lonnie: Regarding the Davis' book, I couldn't agree with you more. Some time ago, it was being offered free as a promo for buying something else. One person commented that the only good thing about the book was that it was free. Good Hunting,