Interesting Machining Variation <img BORDER="0" src='http://boards.rennlist.com/luger/pic.gif'>

Luke · 01-05-2002, 01:39 AM

My 1918 DWM has an interesting machining variation on the frame rear, just below the rear toggle link. See picture.

Instead of being gently rounded, this gun has an abrupt edge in the machining just at the line where the indentation for the loop starts. I pointed this out to Ted Green who believes that this is the original cut and that the gun has not been modified.

Has anyone else seen such a variation?

http://boards.rennlist.com/upload/FrameRear1918DWM.jpg

01-05-2002, 02:57 PM

Dear Luke - yes. My 1918 DWM #52xxc is exactly the same as yours. I'll send you a piccie on your E.mail to prove it. By comparison, my byf/42 is gently rounded.

regards

Terry Foley

Luke · 01-05-2002, 05:41 PM

01-05-2002, 08:55 PM

Dear Luke - nope.

Regards

Terry A de C Foley

Luke · 01-06-2002, 09:54 AM

Seems his 1918 DWM is machined identically.

Wonder why this happened in 1918. Any theories?

http://boards.rennlist.com/upload/Te...His2Lugers.jpg

01-06-2002, 10:01 AM

Luke,

My guess would be that in 1918, both DWM and Erfurt were under a lot of pressure to produce pistols for the troops and many shortcuts were probably allowed. we all knwo the finish di deteriorate as the war progressed and machining shortcuts in non critical areas could produce a few more pistols per day. I plan to loolk at my pistols today and see if any of them have this type cut.

Marvin C.

Luke · 01-06-2002, 10:05 AM

01-06-2002, 02:50 PM

Luke,

I took a look at mine and I have a 1917 DWM and a 1921 dated DWM with the same abrupt machining on the rear of the frame. The 1917 has rough machine marks too. I had never noticed this before and it was very interesting to see if any of mine had this. thanks for bringing this to our attention.

Marvin C.

SteveM · 01-06-2002, 03:29 PM

Just noticed same machining on my 1917 Erfurt.

Luke · 01-06-2002, 05:36 PM

From the pictures posted, it appears that it was a deliberate, not an accidental, variation in the way the metal was machined on the rear of some Lugers. Guess this will remain one of those little mysteries that tend to make the Luger so interesting.

John Sabato · 01-07-2002, 07:20 PM

this is a non-critical dimension and IMHO, either appearance was probably within manufacturing tolerance for final dimensions of the frame, and would have passed final inspection for production and issue.

I imagine that they were just a little more careful on the WW2 guns because manufacturing methods had improved considerably since WW1 and they could be more precise without incurring a production time loss.

I checked the frame blueprints on Frank Rial's CD, but there are no notations about tolerances on the relevant prints where that line "sometimes" appears. Any of you other engineers out there care to comment?

Does anyone have any other copies of Luger frame blueprints that might inidicate manufacturing tolerances for the finish of this portion of the frame that could substantiate or disprove my theory??? Constructive comments are invited and appreciated

regards,

John Sabato

01-05-2002, 01:39 AM	#1
Luke User Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: NC - USA Posts: 1,239 Thanks: 0 Thanked 19 Times in 7 Posts	Interesting Machining Variation My 1918 DWM has an interesting machining variation on the frame rear, just below the rear toggle link. See picture. Instead of being gently rounded, this gun has an abrupt edge in the machining just at the line where the indentation for the loop starts. I pointed this out to Ted Green who believes that this is the original cut and that the gun has not been modified. Has anyone else seen such a variation? http://boards.rennlist.com/upload/FrameRear1918DWM.jpg

01-05-2002, 02:57 PM	#2
Terry A de C Foley Guest Posts: n/a	Re: Interesting Machining Variation Dear Luke - yes. My 1918 DWM #52xxc is exactly the same as yours. I'll send you a piccie on your E.mail to prove it. By comparison, my byf/42 is gently rounded. regards Terry Foley

01-05-2002, 05:41 PM	#3
Luke User Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: NC - USA Posts: 1,239 Thanks: 0 Thanked 19 Times in 7 Posts	Terry, any theories as to WHY? (EOM)

01-05-2002, 08:55 PM	#4
Terry A de C Foley Guest Posts: n/a	Re: Terry, any theories as to WHY? Dear Luke - nope. Regards Terry A de C Foley

01-06-2002, 10:01 AM	#6
Marvin C. Guest Posts: n/a	Re: Pictures of Terry's Two Lugers Luke, My guess would be that in 1918, both DWM and Erfurt were under a lot of pressure to produce pistols for the troops and many shortcuts were probably allowed. we all knwo the finish di deteriorate as the war progressed and machining shortcuts in non critical areas could produce a few more pistols per day. I plan to loolk at my pistols today and see if any of them have this type cut. Marvin C.

01-06-2002, 09:54 AM	#5
Luke User Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: NC - USA Posts: 1,239 Thanks: 0 Thanked 19 Times in 7 Posts	Pictures of Terry's Two Lugers Seems his 1918 DWM is machined identically. Wonder why this happened in 1918. Any theories? http://boards.rennlist.com/upload/Te...His2Lugers.jpg

01-06-2002, 10:05 AM	#7
Luke User Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: NC - USA Posts: 1,239 Thanks: 0 Thanked 19 Times in 7 Posts	Does anyone else have a 1918 DWM like this ? ? ? ? (EOM)

01-06-2002, 02:50 PM	#8
Marvin C. Guest Posts: n/a	Re: Pictures of Terry's Two Lugers Luke, I took a look at mine and I have a 1917 DWM and a 1921 dated DWM with the same abrupt machining on the rear of the frame. The 1917 has rough machine marks too. I had never noticed this before and it was very interesting to see if any of mine had this. thanks for bringing this to our attention. Marvin C.

01-06-2002, 03:29 PM	#9
SteveM User Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Texas Posts: 1,016 Thanks: 94 Thanked 275 Times in 137 Posts	Re: Does anyone else have a 1918 DWM like this ? ? ? ? Just noticed same machining on my 1917 Erfurt.

01-06-2002, 05:36 PM	#11
Luke User Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: NC - USA Posts: 1,239 Thanks: 0 Thanked 19 Times in 7 Posts	Re: Does anyone else have a 1918 DWM like this ? From the pictures posted, it appears that it was a deliberate, not an accidental, variation in the way the metal was machined on the rear of some Lugers. Guess this will remain one of those little mysteries that tend to make the Luger so interesting.

01-07-2002, 07:20 PM	#12
John Sabato Lifer Lifetime Forum Patron Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: The Capital of the Free World Posts: 10,156 Thanks: 3,003 Thanked 2,309 Times in 1,098 Posts	My theory: Just from a manufacturing standpoint, this is a non-critical dimension and IMHO, either appearance was probably within manufacturing tolerance for final dimensions of the frame, and would have passed final inspection for production and issue. I imagine that they were just a little more careful on the WW2 guns because manufacturing methods had improved considerably since WW1 and they could be more precise without incurring a production time loss. I checked the frame blueprints on Frank Rial's CD, but there are no notations about tolerances on the relevant prints where that line "sometimes" appears. Any of you other engineers out there care to comment? Does anyone have any other copies of Luger frame blueprints that might inidicate manufacturing tolerances for the finish of this portion of the frame that could substantiate or disprove my theory??? Constructive comments are invited and appreciated regards, John Sabato