My 1st P.08, a 1914 Erfurt

[feldm�¼tze]

Yesterday I received my first Luger, a 1914 Erfurt, all matching but the magazine. I'm quite pleased with it, wanting one that had a little honest useage & holster wear, but still collector grade. It was supposed to be "correct & matching, except for the mag", but I noticed right off that the grip screws weren't proofed, therefore not Erfurt. I'll post on the WANTED TO BUY to try to get the correct screws. Also, as I recall someone mentioned a thread for swapping magazines...I'd appreciate someone pointing me to that thread, as the mag is a DWM spare. Price was $1200 + shipping. Opinions very welcome!

[Dwight Gruber]

Mike,

See your Private Messages.

--Dwight

[thegundude]

Mike,

Very nice Erfurt. Excellent condition too. I really like the strawing on that one, still very clean...

You did well...

[drbuster]

Oh my, here is another 1914 Erfurt P.08 that is like several now that have surfaced on both Forums! Note that, like the others, it has a non-relieved breechblock, a notched receiver AND a "q" suffix. I used to own one of these with a matching magazine (with one proof mark), also in the "q" suffix range. It created quite a stir among the then Forum members, such as Garfield, etc. As has been reported many times (see Jan Still's Imperial Lugers), only 7000 "authentic" 1914 4" barrel Eefurts were made that year, most of the 1914 production going into LP.08's. The suffix range never got out of the "a" range. So what are these "mongrels" with a "q" suffix (I saw one also with an "r" suffix), notched receivers, relieved breechblocks and one proof on the magazine bottom? They appear (no one can proove it) to be LATER issue guns (1917-1918), with all the features of these years, apparently fitted with ?SPARE? 1914 dated receivers. This piece makes at least the fifth or sixth one like this I've personally seen. I am proud to say that I do own two "original" 1914 Erfurts (2 of 7000!) P.08's with all the correct features!

[Dwight Gruber]

Doc,

I'm sceptical of the 'spare' 1914 receivers. Remember they were subject to the marking instruction which required the /date stamp for a dated receiver assembled into a gun at a later date.

Not that I have an answer to where these guns come fron...

--Dwight

[drbuster]

Dwight, Thanks for your input. First, I must apologize, where I typed "breechblock" above should read "sear bar". Mr. Garrison, as well as others, brought up the apparent "rules" about dating the receivers, but how the heck can one explain "q" suffix with these guns, not to mention the notched receiver, which only appeared on the 1917-1918 models. They had to be later rebuilds.

[feldm�¼tze]

Ok, if only approximately 7000 were manufactured in 1914, then they never even made it to the "a" block. From collecting Gew98 rifles, I'm familiar with the serial numbering system, along with the required date/ stamp for a dated reciver that was assembled later.
I would have thought more of the experienced forum collectors would have stepped up with opinions?
I guess I need to know if the pistol is humped before contacting the seller.
Mike

[George Anderson]

Originally posted by drbuster
about dating the receivers, but how the heck can one explain "q" suffix with these guns, not to mention the notched receiver, which only appeared on the 1917-1918 models. They had to be later rebuilds.

I think that notched receivers on Erfurt P08's appear from 1916 through 1918.

The number of "RC" stampings on the above pistol lead me to conclude that it was put aside in 1914 due to flaws and was subsequently put back into production in 1917 which is why it picked up the "q" suffix.

[drbuster]

Goerge's explanation, or course, could be absolutely correct, no one knows for sure. And notching did begin in 1916. And Mike, the feeling is that these guns probably left the factory like this and were not "boosted" subsequently. The "a" block was indeed reached with original 1914's as the serialization was not consecutive, LP.08's were interspersed.

[Pete Ebbink]

At a minimum, I think this gun is reblued. The lack of "halo" and the shallowness of the underside barrel stampings are indications...

There is some loss of definition in the Erfurt toggle stamping as well...

[Ron Wood]

Pete,
I very well may be a reblue, but according to Jan Still the barrel serial number digits on original condition Erfurt Lugers usually do not exhibit a halo.

[Dwight Gruber]

Mike,

I must counter the thoughts of my good friends George and drbuster with a much more conservative viewpoint.

There existed a known system to denote weapons whose manufacture was completed in years after their chamber date. There are examples known of Erfurt Lugers following this requirement ("A Real Two-date Erfurt" (Luger Forum) ; Jan Still, "Imperial Lugers" p.78). One of the known examples has a chamber date 1914/18 ("1914 Erfurt" (Jan Still's Forum) ).

From a collection standpoint, this 1914 Erfurt will always be questionable due to the lack of a certifiable explanation for its radically out-of-place serial number. While it "could" have come to be by the proffered speculation, this is not enough to warrant its authenticity, or to place a value on it as an original.

Too bad, too, because on the face of it this is a really nice looking Luger.

--Dwight

[Pete Ebbink]

Hi Ron,

You are probably right about the "halo" on Erfurts...I had forgotten I have a 1913 Erfurt in my safe and took a look.

On Randy' pistol, some of the numbers on the undeside of the barrel look odd...as in possibly touched-up with an engraver tool..

The loss of depth in the middle of the Erfurt wording and crown seems odd to me...

There is also a very big, deep gouge on the front of the frame near the TD lever that appears to have blue inside the gouged areas...

Thus my guess that it is a reblue...

[George Anderson]

Dwight, I remember the two date Erfurts. I believe that the pistol above was probably finished in 1915 or later, I think that its' pedigree is demonstrated in the provenance of the individual pistol. There is no sense in boosting a pistol that will sell at the low range. At the sale price of $1200 no one could have made any real money on the sale unless they had simply "turned" the pistol.

Everything about the subject pistol tells me that it is a solid example of a WWI period P08.

[MauserLugers]

Interesting piece. Here are my thoughts.

First, the example is NOT a pure 1914. The relieved sear, and unmarked grip screws date this piece as 1916 or later. In my opinion the unmarked grip screws can be correct for a late Erfurt. The relieved sear means the piece was produced/assembled/refurbished sometime during or later than 1916. The notch on the reciever indicates to me that this was originally intended to be an artillery receiver. So, in my opinion I think these were assembles or refurbished at a later date than 1914, and possible a time frame as late as from 1919 into the late 1920's. With the serial number in the "q" letter block it very well could have been assembled from parts, made to match, and issued to the Weimar military. If you look at Weimar Lugers you will find that military examples are fairly hard to find, as most have a sear safety added and were issued to the police. The extent of the rework varies as does the workmanship. It would be interesting to know what the other oddball 1914 Erfurt Lugers looked like and there serial numbers. This information would be very helpful. So, in my opinion this is not a true 1914 military example and was assembled/refurbished sometime later than 1914. --- Bill

[feldm�¼tze]

I tend to share Dwight's conservative viewpoint. However, if someone was trying to hump/boost it, or the other in the 5000 range (& "q" suffix), why would they not maybe utilize a prefix "b", and have a considerably more valued pistol (and no doubts)?
Imperial Germany was almost considered anal in the regulations, and I can't imagine them not adding the additional date as required. But on the other hand, I'm informed that an estimated 7000 1914 Erfurt P.08's, with prefix reaching into the "a" suffix, have interspersed (serial #'s) with LP.08's that year....that's seems slightly odd, especially from a government arsenal. Is there documentation to validate that?
I guess the bottom line is I've acquired a high priced "shooter".....

[feldm�¼tze]

Also, regarding the three visible inspection failure stamps (crown over "RC"), there's a fourth one on the barrel that's not visible in the pics I posted

[Dwight Gruber]

Originally posted by feldm�¼tze
I'm informed that an estimated 7000 1914 Erfurt P.08's, with prefix reaching into the "a" suffix, have interspersed (serial #'s) with LP.08's that year....that's seems slightly odd, especially from a government arsenal. Is there documentation to validate that?

Mike,

Best documentation for all things Imperial P-08 is Jan Still's "Imperial Lugers". p.15 is a table of serial range, letter suffixes, and production.

As the Imperial-era production records for DWM and Erfurt are no longer extant, data has had to be inferred from the details of reported examples, compared with known manufacturing practice and commentary by people and publications closely contemporary to the source. This information comes from reports, observation, and study by serious collectors for more than 50 years.

Evidence is that in 1914 Erfurt produced a total of 30,000 Lugers--7,000 P-08 with serial numbers with (ns) and a suffixes; and 23,000 LP-08 with (ns), a, and b suffixes (Still's chart notes "less than three" P-08 reported with b suffix).

A 30,000-piece production run is not very large (compare with DWM's estimated 1917 production of more than 180,000 Lugers of all varieties).

1914 was the first year of production of LP-08. There is no fundamental difference between these and the standard Luger; use a rear toggle piece with no sight, make a relief cut on the front of the receiver, install an Artillery barrel with tanagent sight, and you have the LP variety. Having the variations intermixed seems logical. One guesses WAG that over the year's time the Army requests delivery of standard or LP-08 as they need them, and Erfurt simply makes the parts change as necessary in the normal production line.

--Dwight

[drbuster]

Very interesting posts regarding this "mongrel" (my term only, please excuse) 1914 Erfurt. As I have posted above and formerly, I once owned one of these in the "q" range, have seen another in the "q" range, know of a definite one in Texas in the "r" range, and to confuse the issue further, I examined one about a year ago at the Reno show in the proper no suffix range BUT it still had the receiver notch, relieved sear bar and the matching magazine had only one acceptance mark. I really do not think these were boosted guns to fool and exploit collectors, but rather they were probably later assemblies of guns from parts to satisfy the need for guns near the end of WW1 (no proof of course). It's just amazing to me that now I have either owned, examined, seen on this Forum, or heard of from reliable sources, of six of these "mongrels".

[John D.]

This is a very interesting thread - and I'm personally interested in the thoughts brought forward. The reason I'm personally "vested" in this is that I'm about to close a deal I've been working on for a few months on a "1914" Erfurt in, yes - the "q" block. It too has the receiver notch, relieved sear - but not a matched MAG. Interesting to note is that the grip screws are NOT proofed, but the grips do match?? While it's not in my possession yet - this thread has given me some pause - as I take Jan Still's book the definative research to date on this variation.

If I do acquire this piece - I'll post it up with photos - and try to see what, if anything - we can deduce - if anything..??!!

Hope this helps,

John D.