1920 Commercial Lugers

[bill m]

Hi,

I'd like to know where a lot of the posts are getting the idea that the 1920 commercial Lugers were made up of used Lugers and from used parts? I've read this a couple of times now and I personally think that almost all of the 1920 Commercials were of new manufactor.


If you look at the way the Lugers were made, you will find that what most people call a 1920 Commercial is actually a 1923 commercial. The 5 digit serial numbers were used on the 1908 commercials -- 1913 and 1914 commercials, and then the 1920 commercials. These actually had a 5 digit serial numbers and went up to 1921. We know this because of the Krieghoff commercials in the i block are stamped with the 1921 date. Then the 1923 commercials were actually started up in the i suffix and continued on. These have a 4 digit serial number with a letter suffix. Still in his book "Weimar Lugers" has different names for the variations, but the idea is the same. These 1923 commercials were actually made from 1921 up to possibly 1933. Anyway, they started in the "i" block and went clear up to the "V" block when Mauser started production.


So, in concluding, it would almost be impossible for used parts to be used in what some are calling 1920 commercials, as there were literally thousands of Lugers made before these. If Imperial Lugers were being refurbished on a huge scale, then you should be able to see sign of the Imperial proofs and ect., like you do on the Weimar Police guns, or double dates. These all had military style of serial placement, where the commercial guns have the commercial style. I personally think that almost all of the commercial Lugers were made of new parts and the Weimar military and police guns were almost all made of refurbished Imperial Lugers.


More information has become known since a lot of the older books were published, and everyone agree's that what was referred to as a 1920 commercial a few years ago, is actually a Luger made later, in 1921 to at least 1929 and possible even to 1933. So, I'm not buying that old statement that these 1920's are made up from Imperial guns and ect., as they are in there own suffix blocks. Just my opinion. What ya think?

[Aaron]

I wish it was true that the 1920 Lugers were made up of new parts. However, I have seen and also owned too many 1920 models where the attempt to remove the chamber date is very visible. I notice it is not uncommon to see a flattened chamber area where the date has been ground off, and a couple of times I have actually been able to make out a few numerals of the date when holding the gun under a really good light. Another point to be considered is, with warehouses full of surplus military Lugers and parts, and with the economy crashing down on their heads, and a desperate need for foreign income, why would they take the time and go to the effort and expense of trying to manufacture new guns? Please convince me that I'm wrong, as I really want my minty 1920 Commercials to be classified as "new Lugers."

[bill m]

Lets look at this from the aspect of an Imperial DWM 1916. If I was to rework this pistol in -- say -- 1926 -- then this pistol would have of been laying around for 10 years to start with. Second, I have to change the barrel. Next, I have to remove all the Imperial markings -- that means the breech, and receiver proofs, and any unit markings, and the date. Next, I have to remove all of the military serial numbers from almost all parts of the gun. Now that I have done this, I have to serial number all the parts in a commercial style and in the correct letter suffix. Reblue and restraw the gun. Nope, I do not think so, as this took too much labor and too much time, and the numbering system would of been a terrible mess to go through, as you would of had to use the same parts, or the fit would not be proper.


I think they used these Imperial Lugers for all the Weimar military and police Lugers. If you look at the reworked guns for the Weimar military and police you will see that an awful lot of them retain their Imperial acceptance marks and test proofs. Some do have an additional c/n commercial proof.


If the military guns were going to be used as commercial guns, why would they bother to remove the serial numbers from all parts? Why would they bother to remove the acceptance marks? Why not just change the barrel and stamp a C/N?


I think there is a lot of confusion on a commercial gun and a reworked military or police gun, and that what a lot of people are referring to with the chamber ground and the acceptance marks removed or some of them anyway, are actually Weimar military reworks or Weimar police reworks. These usually show a lot of evidence of reworking and usually show some of the original acceptance marks and proofing. The true 1920 commercial do not show this rework.

[Kyrie]

Hi Bill,


I'm afraid I have to respectfully disagree.


"1920 Commercial" is the name given to Lugers produced (or "reproduced") in Germany in the 1920's, usually with 7.65 mm Parabellum barrels, usually with commercial proof, and with serial numbers in the military numbering system and style. Many of these pistols still show Great War military proof and acceptance, and have chamber dates from the Great War. These Imperial marking may or may not be partially obliterated. In those pistols without chamber dates a close examination of the chamber area of the barrel extension will generally show that area to be out of round due to the removal of a chamber date. The military serial numbering and remnants of WWI chamber dates, as well as the other Imperial markings, establishes these pistols were originally made before the Weimar era.


"1923 Commercial" is the name given by collectors to Lugers that are similar to 1920 Commercials, except that they are serial numbered in the commercial serial number range (73500 through 96000, according to Kenyon) in the commercial style, and have no Imperial markings.


There are pictures of a1920 Commercial Artillery and a 1923 Commercial from my collection pictured in the Owners' Corner. If you would be so kind as to take a look at those I think you may see why collectors have differentiated between the two variations as they have.


Best regards,


Kyrie

[bill m]

Hi Kyrie,

I know the difference between what Kenyon called a 1920 commercial and a 1923 commercial. The fact is -- that this is the wrong time frame for these. The 1923's as Kenyon calls them were actually made before the 1920's as Kenyon calls them. This is a fact. Kenyon's book is old and it is a fact that his names are actually backwards. Do some research on this and you will find out that I am correct as to the dates of manufacture. So, that being said, why isn't the "1923's" as you referr to them, made up of these Imperial guns? They were actually made before the "1920's" as you call them.


You are totally wrong as to the serial numbering of the "1920" commercial being in the military style serial placement. That is why we call these guns commercial or military. They are in the commercial style, just like the "1923" commercials, with the only difference the 5 digit serial number. These all have the serial number on the underside of the sideplate and takedown lever, instead of on the outer surfaces. When they are marked on the outer surface that is the military style. That just makes my opinion stronger as to you saying that they are numbered in the military style, which would mean that they are actually a military gun, and not a commercial gun. The placement of the serial numbers is one of the tools we use to determine if the gun is a commercial or a military.


My 1920 commercial is #6439 M, and it is of new manufacture. Again, I think these with partial Imperial markings are actually Weimar military or police guns. I have actually never seen a true "1920" commercial in the (i through t) blocks that showed remains of DWM or Erfurt parts, but have numerous and have seen numberous Weimar military and police guns that still show partial Imperial markings or a combination of both.


What I'm referring to as a "1920" commercial is a Luger in 30 Luger, with under a 4inch barrel, with Germany stamped on the frame, and C/N proofs on the barrel, breech, and receiver, in the (i block through t blocks). Some had longer barrel lengths, but most are these short barrels, and a few were in 9mm. Why doesn't the 9mm Lugers just have an original Imperial barrel on them? They don't.


Again Kyrie, we disagree. Perhaps a few were refurbished, but I feel that most were of new manufacture, and what Kenyon wrote 40 years ago was his opinion then, but that some new facts have been brought forward. Always fun to disagree with you.

[Johnny Peppers]

The out of sequence date name for the 1920 and 1923 Commercial can be attributed to Harry Jones. Kenyon merely picked it up when he came out with his book some ten years later and perpetuated the error. What Harry named the 1923 Commercial was merely a continuation of the 1914 Commercial after WWI. Commercial production ceased in WWI with serial numbers in the mid 70,000 range. After production resumed after WWI, DWM picked right back up where the serial numbering had ended during the war around 75,000. Upon approaching a six digit serial number, DWM decided to use a suffix serial number as had previously been used on the military pistols. As the serial number range was in the 90,000 range, DWM started with a i suffix to keep the progression of serial numbers correct for record. The i being the 9th letter in the alphabet, would have been the correct suffix if that numbering system had started with the Model 1900.

Harry Jones also started the story of the post WWI DWM commercial pistols being made from reclaimed WWI pistols, and again Kenyon continued the story. If you look at the page on the Erfurt LP08 in Harry Jone's book, you will also learn that the LP08 Erfurt was made from 1914 thru 1918. There is an unsubstantiated report of a 1915 dated Erfurt LP08, but certainly none dated after that. The only explaination was that Harry saw the Erfurt frames with the clearance cut for the tangent sight and assumed that these were reworked LP08's. Very little substantiated information was available when Harry wrote his book, and he went on a lot of assumptions. I certainly respect what Harry Jones and Charles Kenyon have done for the Luger collector, but there is a world of new information out there. It is not my opinion, but the opinions of some of the most knowledgeable Luger experts out there.

There is a misconception that any Luger with the export stamp GERMANY is a commercial gun. It may have been sold through commercial channels, but any DWM or Erfurt military Luger remains a military pistol no matter which channel it was sold through. During the 50's and 60's many M1 Rifles and 1911A1 pistols were brought back from England through commercial channels and these weapons have British commercial proofs, but these weapons remain 100% military issue.

This just all confuses me. I don't know much about the pre-Nazi era pistols.

I do have a 1921 marked DWM that has the 3-7/8" 30 cal barrel, the remnants of Imperial eagles on the frame, C/N on the barrel, the frame, the toggle, and breechblock, a four digit K block serial number in military style, clearly the pistol was refinished and restrawed some time in the past and the thing is drilled for a sear safety. All the numbered parts match but the extractor, rear pivot pin, breechblock and firing pin are NOT numbered.

Clearly the thing was rebuilt by somebody, sometime.


It's really a nice little pistol, but I don't know much about it at all.


Mike

[bill m]

Hi,

You do not have a 1920 commercial, but a police gun that has been worked over. By whom and when I do not know.

[Kyrie]

Hi Bill,


Yes sir, I understand you are an adherent of the school of thought espoused by Jan Still on the 1920 Lugers. However, please be aware that this school of thought, like that espoused by Charles Kenyon, is 90% guesswork and opinion based on observed samples. Neither school of thought is fact, or even uncontested opinion. I would therefore suggest to you, both respectfully and cordially, that sentences and phrases such as â??This is a fact.â?�, â??I am correctâ?�, and â??You are totally wrongâ?� would be wisely avoided


I would also suggest to you, again most respectfully and cordially, that if you espouse Jan Stillâ??s school of thought, you use his terminology to do so. I make this suggestion because if you were to do so I think you will make an interesting discovery. The school of thought espoused by Jan Still does not account for a great many of the Lugers we know of as â??1920 Commercials.â?� Specifically those Lugers with non-standard barrels (7.65 Parabellum, of various lengths), Imperial dates, acceptance marks, and proof (frequently partially removed), military style and placement serial numbers, and usually but not always marked â??Germanyâ?� or â??Made in Germany.â?� These Lugers are one of the more common of Luger variations, and their omission from Jan Stillâ??s theory of Luger production in the 1920â??s is one of the major hurdles he must overcome to have his school of thought more commonly accepted.


The subject of new manufacture (e.g. made completely form new parts) versus refurbished (e.g. made from a mixture of Imperial Era and newly made parts) is a separate issue from the controversy of Kenyon versus Still. Still even acknowledges that some of the Lugers he classifies as the various 1920 variations may be found with reworked Imperial Era parts. On this, at least, he and Kenyon are in agreement.


Your Luger that you reference as a â??1920 commercialâ?� (serial number 6439 M) and indicate is â??of new manufactureâ?� may or may not actually be new manufacture. If you examine the barrel extension very carefully you may well find the barrel extension is out of round due to the removal of an Imperial Era chamber date, and a number of the small parts may show slight thinning where an Imperial Era serial number was removed. Many pistols that at first glance appear to be new manufacture will, upon close examination, be found to contain a number of re-worked Imperial Era parts. The first contract 1923 Finnish Luger of mine pictured in the Ownersâ?? Corner is an example of just this.


All of that said, Iâ??m aware that we will continue to disagree. And I suspect we have reached the point where it would be best to â??agree to disagreeâ?� and move on to other topics. Itâ??s not like there arenâ??t other areas worthy of discussion


Best regards,


Kyrie

[Kyrie]

Hi Mike,


You have what Kenyon would call a â??1920 Commercialâ?�, and Jan Still would call an â??Alphabet DWM, Commercial Subvariationâ?�. Is the breech block proof marked? If so, is the proof Imperial, Commercial, or Weimar? If it is unproofed, it (and the other un-numbered parts) may be parts replaced here in the US. That the barrel extension is cut for a sear safety is interesting, and would imply the barrel extension was, at some point in time, on a police pistol.


Best regards,


Kyrie

[bill m]

Hi Kyrie,

You're absolutely correct in that we will continue to disagree. I most cordially and respectfully disagree with just about all of your statements. Okay, this is information for the forum's knowledge, or at least reading, and if you do not want to accept or use it, that is your choice. Charlie Kenyon wrote an article in Gun Report stating the same thing, that his "1920's" were actually made after his "1923's", and that new information and research had put this into the proper perspective. I am simply using information that is common knowledge, like military serial numbering styles and commercial serial numbering styles. There is a Big Difference between a 1920 variation and a 1920 commercial. You are lumping all kinds of stuff together and just calling them 1920 commercials which is not correct, in my cordial and respectful opinion. So, don't accept it if you don't think it is correct, that is your choice, but perhaps some of the other members will find it useful and helpful, and at least interesting. Look forward to disagreeing with you again soon.

Best regards,

bill m

[bill m]

Hi Kyrie,

Please explain your explanation on calling this a "1920 commercial", as it is drilled for a SEAR SAFETY, which did not take place until the Nazi era in 1932 or later. How can this be a "1920 Commercial" when it has evidence of 1930's Nazi use?

That's part of what confuses me about this pistol.

Clearly, it's a rework of some type. It's a 7.65, has C/N proofs on otherwise un-numbered parts, is very flat and square with no sign that it has ever seen a buffing wheel, yet tiny blue filled pitting shows that this pistol has been refinished and in a manner that looks original. The strawing is about 60%, but the pistol has clearly been hot dipped after a sanding to a standard military blue finish.

And there is that sear safety drilling.

This wasn't an expensive pistol by any means and I bought it at a price that was cheap even for a shooter. Of course, 7.65 gets the kiss of death price on shooters.

It's a neat little pistol. It shows evidence of firing a lot of corrosive ammo in the rough but not pitted bore.


It's my representative 7.65 Luger. Representing anything other than 30 Luger, I don't know.


It's really a neat little pistol that I didn't pay much for. It IS as nice as some other pistols I have that I paid 6 times the price for.


Mike

Kyrie, I must admit that I am an adherent of Jan Still's "theoies" regarding these lugers since his data is the most current available in Weimar Lugers. But please don't limit him or ourselves to previously published data. I understand that Jan is still doing research on commericals in general, for his next Volume, just on this area.

[Johnny Peppers]

Sounds like your pistol has been reworked in the not too distant past. The mixture of strawed small parts and hot dipped blue doesn't go together. As a police pistol it would have been 9mm.

The pistol is faily crisp but it doesn't look at all recent.


Mike

[bill m]

Hi JP, Mike,

This gun is not a 1920 commercial, but a combination of a couple of guns. The 1921 date and the drilled sear safety show it was originally a 1921 Dated police Luger in the NO Suffix, A, or B blocks in 9MM, with a four inch barrel.


The four digit serial number with the K suffix is another gun. Probably the barrel, toggle and frame are from this gun and the receiver is from another gun.


When it was dipped and assembled is a good guess, but probably after WWII for sure.