My first Luger!!

[Don M]

Hello to all:

I'm a new member, a new Luger owner, a gun novice and new to chat rooms. I'm also amazed at how quickly I've become obsessed with this subject.

I recently inherited the rig pictured below from an uncle who was a US infantyman in Europe in 1944-45 and brought it back with him. He never shared any further information about how he got it.

<a href="http://forums.lugerforum.com/lfupload/luger_3299q.jpg" target="_fullview"><img src="http://forums.lugerforum.com/lfupload/luger_3299q.jpg" width="400" alt="Click for fullsize image" /></a>

[Photo thumbnailed by admin-JS, click on the photo to see it full size.]

I recently took the gun to to a collectors' gun shop in Houston. An apparently knowledgeable employee told me he thought the gun was produced in about 1926-28, initially as a .30-cal commercial model, rebarreled with a 9-mm barrel, and issued to the Police School in Muenster. It obviously subsequently ended up in military service. The holster is military issue dated 1937. He estimated the value of the gun at about US$850 and the entire rig at about US$1000.

I plan to submit another posting with more detailed descriptions and photos but would like to ask a couple of basic questions first:
1. Which forum would be most appropriate for this topic?
2. I'd like to clean the gun first. Is Varsol a suitable sovent for an accumulation of over 50 years of congealed oil?

Thanks in advance for your help. I look forward to sharing more information about my new obsession and hearing members' opinions about its origins and value.

Best regards,
Don

[policeluger]

A picture look down on the top would be most interesting and help in additional information we may be able to provide, you said it was 30 cal change to 9mm, does the chamber have a 7.65 on it crossed out ? indicating the the barrel was changed to 9mm, any front grip strap markings? and are the two mags serial numbered to the gun? lot of queston but is sure looks go so far...give us a shot of other side also...thanks

[John D.]

Hey Don..!

Talk about a "grand entrance" to the LugerForum..!! <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="wink.gif" /> WELCOME!!!!

I'm not the person to assist with your Luger, but - if you'd like to add info to this thread and your Luger within this Forum (New Members) - feel free!!! If it looks, at a later time, you'd like it moved to another Forum - pop me a PM, and I'll move it for you, OK?

In the meantime - again - Welcome!!!

A great picture, a terrific first post - and a Luger that has been passed within a family is outstanding....

Best to you,

John D.

[Don M]

Thanks for the welcome. I'll take the advice to stay with this forum.

The gun has a 4-in, 9-mm barrel and has "GESICHERT" and "GELADEN" on the safety recess and extractor, respectively. The gun shop guys tell me the bore is in very good condition. The bluing seem to be about 80% or more with most of the wear on the left side, probably from holstering. The left side grip is also somewhat worn.
<a href="http://forums.lugerforum.com/lfupload/3299q_left_side.jpg" target="_fullview"><img src="http://forums.lugerforum.com/lfupload/3299q_left_side.jpg" width="400" alt="Click for fullsize image" /></a>

As shown in the photo in my original post, there are no markings on the right side. The left side of the receiver has a crown/N proof mark.

The toggle has a DWM logo and there are no marks above the chamber.
<a href="http://forums.lugerforum.com/lfupload/3299q_receiver_top.jpg" target="_fullview"><img src="http://forums.lugerforum.com/lfupload/3299q_receiver_top.jpg" width="400" alt="Click for fullsize image" /></a>

The bottom of the barrel has a very small proof mark consisting of a stylized eagle. I have not been able to find an illustration of an identical mark. The barrel/receiver witness mark seems very similar to Example 03 in Dwight Gruber's article on this site illustrating a "perfect" mark. Although the barrel and receiver proof marks are different, I question the rebarrelling judgement of the gun shop guy noted in my original post.
<a href="http://forums.lugerforum.com/lfupload/3299q_barrel_marks.jpg" target="_fullview"><img src="http://forums.lugerforum.com/lfupload/3299q_barrel_marks.jpg" width="400" alt="Click for fullsize image" /></a>

The frame has the serial no. "3299" with a suffix I have interpreted as a "q" with the tail missing because of the curvature of the trigger guard. It looks identical to the upper part of one of the "q"s on Gortz's sheet on this site. The next closest match would be a "g" but, assuming this is a DWM commercial model produced between 1921 and 1928, this would not be possible since the suffixes ran from "i" to "r" according to Henrotin in his e-book on DWM Lugers.
<a href="http://forums.lugerforum.com/lfupload/3299q_frame_sn.jpg" target="_fullview"><img src="http://forums.lugerforum.com/lfupload/3299q_frame_sn.jpg" width="400" alt="Click for fullsize image" /></a>

The barrel and reciever have the serial no. "3299." A two-digit serial no. "99" is stamped on the exterior of the front (faint) and rear toggle links, the trigger plate (side and lower edge), takedown lever (lower edge), breechblock, sear bar and safety bar. Only visible when partially field-stripped, the trigger is marked "31" and the rear toggle pin is marked "86." I've also noted that the inside of the trigger plate also has the marks "4" and "32." I don't know what to make of all this!

The front grip strap is marked "P.M.477." which, I'm told, indicates the gun was issued to the Police School in Muenster.
<a href="http://forums.lugerforum.com/lfupload/3299q_front_grip_strap.jpg" target="_fullview"><img src="http://forums.lugerforum.com/lfupload/3299q_front_grip_strap.jpg" width="400" alt="Click for fullsize image" /></a>

The magazines have aluminum bases and are not matched to the gun. The acceptance mark on the left magazine apparently is that of Waffenamt Inspector 63. I can't find any illustrations similar to the acceptance mark on the right magazine. It appears to have the top part of "37." Whether this has any relationship to the 1937 date on the holster is an open question.
<a href="http://forums.lugerforum.com/lfupload/magazine_bases.jpg" target="_fullview"><img src="http://forums.lugerforum.com/lfupload/magazine_bases.jpg" width="400" alt="Click for fullsize image" /></a>

I'm tired and it's getting past my bed time so I'll shut it down. I'll very much appreciate any opinions on what I have here.

Best regards,
Don

[Don M]

tac,thanks for the quick response.

There is nothing struck out on the barrel or receiver.

I only have the two suffix charts on the LugerForum to compare with. I suppose it could be an "a" but this interpretation would have the same problem as "g"....namely, that the suffixes for commercial DWM production during the 1920s started with "i". Of course, if it's not a Wiemar commercial model....

The "expert" I consulted at a local collectors' gun shop went to the back room to consult a reference and emerged with the pronouncement that "P.M." means the Police School in Muenster. He seemed to know what he was talking about but I can't confirm it.

[John Sabato]

IMHO this character is a lower case 'q' that was poorly struck on the lower half...

here is the complete "q" character from the excellent serial number suffix pages of this site.



The top half appears to me to be identical to your photo above...

[Edward Tinker]

Tac, I don't know if I agree?
I thought it more of an A, but now seeing the marks side by side...

1920 DWM Rework "a":

G Date S/42 "a"
and the cropped image of above:

Image of a "q" from the excellent (oops!) suffix area

[Ron Smith]

The mag on the right is a K date with scroll S is'nt it? I can't get to my books.

Ron

[Dwight Gruber]

I have to question the "perfectness" of the witness mark, you need to examine it under extreme magnification. It appears to me here that there are two marks, a smaller one neatly overstamping a larger one; and the larger mark on the receiver is not aligned with the larger one on the barrel.

--Dwight

[Don M]

Dwight, I'll try to take a better closeup of the witness mark to illustrate your point.

If it has been rebarreled, any speculation on who did the rebarreling? DWM? A police armorer?

Don

[Don M]

Dwight's right!!

Here's a better view of the witness mark showing the second strike, especially on the barrel. However, it still looks like the larger (original) strike is in alignment. Could there have been two strikes back-to-back?


I've also got a better view of the barrel proof mark. Any ideas about this?


Don

[RockinWR]

Don M.,
* The attached URL might answer some of your questions:

http://www.gunboards.com/luger/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=2200

* A "q" block with a Simson barrel proof made new or re-barrelled from a 7.65mm DWM (BKIW) commercial for a Police contract about 1927. As you can see the noted author and collector, Jan Still, believes these are newly made pistols
* I think the interesting question is "who" did the Weimar Alpha DWM "q" blocks for the Police?
- Was it Simson who was sanctioned by the Allied Commission to supply Lugers during this period? Did Simson purchase BKIW commercials & rebarrel to 9mm for a Police contract?
- Was it BKIW who had the capacity, capability, survival need, and spares to assembly a large order for Police replacement upgrades; but, needed the Simson proof(?)/acceptance(?) for the 9mm rework to gain covert coverage from the Allied Commission Inspectors?? While Sam Costanzo (WOLI) calls this barrel stamp a Simson stamp and it has the form of a number of stamps attributes to Simson, is it in fact a Simson stamp??
- Was the barrel conversion done by the Police themselves & we are looking at a Police re-proof barrel mark?
* BKIW is known to have shipped the Finns a batch of "q" blocks; so, it appears Contract pistols were the order of the day @ DWM.
* In any event, where is the Police sear safety on this example? Did this pistol escape that addition because it was actively used at a Police school & could not be made available for this update?
* The "b" block, blue tubed mag likely came from a 1938 S/42 P.08. This is intuitively contemporary to the 1937 holster. The "3172 no suffix", bright tube mag does indeed look like a "K" date mag with an O37 acceptance and block "S" mark. The "37" does not relate to the year 1937; but, rather to the Waffenamt inspector's "team" number assigned to the Mauser plant in 1934.
* Thats what makes the Weimar era so interesting. Just about the time you have a shread of continuity, the unexpected exception arises.
* Hope this answers more questions than it poses.
Respectfully,
Bob

[Dwight Gruber]

Bob,

Simson was sanctioned by the Allied Commission--actually, had the exclusive contract--to manufacture 9mm 4" barrel Lugers for the Weimar Army.

DWM/BKIW was allowed to manufacture "civilian" pistols, barrels shorter than 4" and smaller than 9mm. Many of these guns are found rebarrelled in standard length 9mm for Police use, a technical violation of the Commission's regulations.

WAG follows.

It is an interesting open question as to whether these DWM Lugers were sold as .30 caliber guns and rebarrelled at Police armories, or rebarrelled at DWM after being sold to Police departments as "civilian" guns thus satisfying the requirement to not manufacture "military spec" guns.

Simson producing DWM guns as you consider is extraordinarily speculative.

A conservative turn of mind would think that the mark is not a Simson proof, as it does not look like any accepted Simson Eagle and does not surmount the 6 inspector's identity. Police conversions are found with the standard c/N nitro proof (suggesting factory rebarrelling). Without documentation, this mark joins the ranks of unexplained mystery markings.

--Dwight

[Don M]

Now we're getting somewhere! My thanks to Dwight and Bob for a plethora of information.

It appears from the posts at the referenced URL that there are several "q" block police Lugers around with serial numbers near mine and that a 1927 production date is very likely, confirming the opinion referenced in my original post. The guy at the gun shop is looking better and better.

Can anyone confirm that the "P.M.477." on the front grip strap refers to the Police School in Muenster?

In addition to having a gun very similar to mine, the person who initiated the topic at that URL apparently has a holster that matches mine down to the manufacturer, inspector and date.

Don

[Edward Tinker]

Don, I am unsure if this is as accuarate as Jan Stills books or Goertz, but this website has markings;

http://www.radix.net/~bbrown/police_unit_marks.html

I don't know if there was a police school in Muenster? ((but it sounds logical))
If you go by this website then it is for Arsenal in Muenchen (munich) and I don't believe that is correct.

Ed

[Dwight Gruber]

Don,

According to Annex 10 of the 1932 Prussian Police Directive, PM. is the designation for the Polizeischul M�¼nster. And this raises a bit of a controversy.

Your unit marking is P.M. Note that there is a period after the P. In the arcane topic of unit markings, the periods are meaningful--a mark with a period between two letters can signify something very different from the same two letters without.

There are collectors who are "strict constructionists", who assert that only unit marks which are stamped completely in accord with the regulations can be interpreted. They would suggest that the organization your unit marking represents cannot be determined because it is not a documented marking.

Other collectors will make allowances for the human element in the actual stamping of these marks, particularly in the case of Police armorers who may not be familiar with the rigors of the system. Police School markings seem to be particularly susceptible to this non-standard marking, noteably the specified LSAl. (Police School Allenstein) stamped LS.Al. and the very controversial HP. / H.P. , there are a couple others.

So no, your P.M. marking cannot be absolutely confirmed as the Police School in M�¼nster, but that interpretation would be commonly accepted. It would be interesting and meaningful if Lugers were reported marked PM. .

--Dwight

--Dwight

[Don M]

Muchas gracias to Ed and Dwight for adding even more information (and questions) to the mix.

Anyone care to venture an opinion as to whether I have a shooter or collectors item?

Don

[Don M]

More on the "P.M." vs "PM." discrepancy based on a quick read of the information on police unit marks...

Is it possible/plausible that a Police School was created in Muenster after the 1922 regulations were issued with the form "P.X." and before the 1930 regulations specified the form "PX."? If so, the 1922 form would probably have been used, resulting in "P.M." This would be consistent with a production date of 1927, assuming the gun was initially issued to the police.

Don

[Edward Tinker]

Here is your answer: </font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana,Tahoma,Arial,Helvetica,Geneva">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana,Tahoma,Arial,Helvetica,Geneva">I recently inherited the rig pictured below from an uncle who was a US infantyman in Europe in 1944-45 and brought it back with him. He never shared any further information about how he got it.</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana,Tahoma,Arial,Helvetica,Geneva">Here is your answer I believe! I would shoot it a bit, but not much? Just my 2 cents!

Ed

[policeluger]

Dwight
"It is an interesting open question as to whether these DWM Lugers were sold as .30 caliber guns and rebarrelled at Police armories, or rebarrelled at DWM after being sold to Police departments as "civilian" guns thus satisfying the requirement to not manufacture "military spec" guns." I've been thing about your quote since it was posted. I believe far to much work was/is attribut to police dept. armories. Getting ready here to build a custom rifle for a guy, I will start with an old action, so keep with me here, but as I need high dollar tools to spin the old barrel off, finish machine work for a crush fit to reciever new barrel, finish ream, correct head space bla..bla..bla...did pre 1945 police dept have the tools and the experance to do this type of work, I do the same once in a while for our local police, believe me they are not trained gun smiths. I see offered for sale, pre 1945, police sub cal units, but I don't recall seeing police gun smith tools required to do this knid of work, showing up anywhere. Has anybody got rock solid proof that PD's had this type of tooling, are German PD's doing similsr type work today, at any level ? thanks