P08 Holster Identification

HH · 07-25-2008, 12:17 AM

I seek the assistance of you holster experts to identify the origin of a very old P08 holster. The holster was given me with a 1912/1920 double date Erfurt. All of the numbers match on the gun and there is a sear safety. There was a take down tool in the holster and it had obviously been in the tool pocket for a long time. There are no identification markings of any kind on either the holster or the tool. Photos attached. I hope.
I tried posting this on the Holster Forum with no luck. Sorry.
Many thanks to Ron M and Ed Tinker for their help.

HH · 07-25-2008, 12:20 AM

This is the back of the holster.

Mauser720 · 07-25-2008, 01:01 AM

HH -

You're welcome.

Someone who knows about authentic versus reproduction loading tools might be interested to know what was the thickness of the tool when you measured it? (As shown in the above photograph)

Mauser720 - Ron

HH · 07-26-2008, 12:27 AM

Thanks, Ron. The tool measured just under an 1/8th of an inch at .115.

raygun · 07-26-2008, 09:50 AM

The belt loops look too close together ?

have you been over it with a good magnifying glass . might pick up some very faded markings !?

HH · 07-26-2008, 03:14 PM

Thanks. I have been over the holster with a glass. There are two remote posibilities. There is a small mark on each belt strap less than .25 in. in size. The marks are too vague to identify as stamps. I would attribute them to wear except that the peripherial edges seem too distinct to have been formed by wear.

lboos · 07-26-2008, 06:49 PM

im a long way from being a holster guru. all i know is what i have pick,ed up here by you real experts. the belt straps on my 1937 holster are about 4-3/4 in apart and the frt. strap is about 1/2 in lower then the rear one. on the one in the pic. some of the sewing looks poor unlike correct holster,s i have seen and the two i own . the holster straps in the pic. looks to be about 1/4 in apart. to me it look,s like an older repo. but, just my humble opin.
sorry if im wrong. boos

Russ · 07-26-2008, 07:01 PM

It looks like a comercial holster. Has Jerry looked at it. The buckle looks wrong to me. Most early comercil holsters had a lether wraped buckle. The cleaning rod space in front of mag pouch and pin punch next to the take down tool is like the comercial holsters that I have had or have. Hope this helps. Buy Benders book on luger holsters..

GerColctor · 07-27-2008, 02:07 PM

Russ is correct, it is a commerical holster. No maker's mark, no date and the addition of the cleaning rod and the punch pin slots all indicate commerical manufacture.

I have a very similar holster, also brown with the same type of buckle.
Joe

HH · 07-27-2008, 06:01 PM

Thank you, all, for your informed input. It appears that a commercial holster is what I have. I had no idea and without your help would have remained in the dark.

07-25-2008, 01:01 AM	#3
Mauser720 User Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Kansas Posts: 535 Thanks: 18 Thanked 49 Times in 33 Posts	HH - You're welcome. Someone who knows about authentic versus reproduction loading tools might be interested to know what was the thickness of the tool when you measured it? (As shown in the above photograph) Mauser720 - Ron __________________ Mauser720 - Ron "Those who do not know history are doomed to repeat it."

07-26-2008, 09:50 AM	#5
raygun User Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: brisbane Posts: 150 Thanks: 3 Thanked 3 Times in 3 Posts	The belt loops look too close together ? have you been over it with a good magnifying glass . might pick up some very faded markings !? __________________ arma tuentur pacem

07-26-2008, 07:01 PM	#8
Russ User Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Reading, PA. Posts: 628 Thanks: 2 Thanked 38 Times in 10 Posts	It looks like a comercial holster. Has Jerry looked at it. The buckle looks wrong to me. Most early comercil holsters had a lether wraped buckle. The cleaning rod space in front of mag pouch and pin punch next to the take down tool is like the comercial holsters that I have had or have. Hope this helps. Buy Benders book on luger holsters.. __________________ Livin the dream!!!!!!!!!!!

07-27-2008, 02:07 PM	#9
GerColctor User Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: CT & FL Posts: 318 Thanks: 2 Thanked 53 Times in 33 Posts	Russ is correct, it is a commerical holster. No maker's mark, no date and the addition of the cleaning rod and the punch pin slots all indicate commerical manufacture. I have a very similar holster, also brown with the same type of buckle. Joe __________________ It is better to have lived a day as a tiger, then a thousand years as a lamb.

07-26-2008, 12:27 AM	#4
HH User Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: South Orange County, CA Posts: 8 Thanks: 0 Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts	Thanks, Ron. The tool measured just under an 1/8th of an inch at .115.

07-26-2008, 03:14 PM	#6
HH User Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: South Orange County, CA Posts: 8 Thanks: 0 Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts	Thanks. I have been over the holster with a glass. There are two remote posibilities. There is a small mark on each belt strap less than .25 in. in size. The marks are too vague to identify as stamps. I would attribute them to wear except that the peripherial edges seem too distinct to have been formed by wear.

07-26-2008, 06:49 PM	#7
lboos User Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: Ga. Posts: 69 Thanks: 4 Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts	im a long way from being a holster guru. all i know is what i have pick,ed up here by you real experts. the belt straps on my 1937 holster are about 4-3/4 in apart and the frt. strap is about 1/2 in lower then the rear one. on the one in the pic. some of the sewing looks poor unlike correct holster,s i have seen and the two i own . the holster straps in the pic. looks to be about 1/4 in apart. to me it look,s like an older repo. but, just my humble opin. sorry if im wrong. boos

07-27-2008, 06:01 PM	#10
HH User Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: South Orange County, CA Posts: 8 Thanks: 0 Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts	Thank you, all, for your informed input. It appears that a commercial holster is what I have. I had no idea and without your help would have remained in the dark.