REWORKED LANDJÃ??GEREI LP08s

[Don M]

I thought I would dust this off and see if there are any contributers out there. I am somewhat surprised that no one on this forum knows of more of these.

[Edward Tinker]

Don, I will look tonight (if I remember) at what I have laying out (had an ATF inspection scheduled tomorrow, but it was cancelled). I have owned several of these, and seen several more.

I think what throws many folks off and myself included is that the receiver cut and imperial markings / date is not a guarantee that it was an artillery.


So, I have a tendacy to overlook these, I simply do not have the inclination of some collectors of looking really, really close at my lugers, a mental failure on my part I know.


Ed

[Don M]

Originally Posted by Edward Tinker

I think what throws many folks off and myself included is that the receiver cut and imperial markings / date is not a guarantee that it was an artillery.

Ed,

I agree that the receiver cut and Imperial-era date & proofs do not necessarily define a former LP08, but if you add the features of the PTV stamp on the barrel and not having had a police marking on the grip strap prior to 1930, you have a strong case. I was hoping that you and Dwight would pursue this topic for your new book on police Lugers.

[Edward Tinker]

ahhh, more stress Don, I see


If I don't get maimed by my wife for ignoring her due to my gun hobby interests, I'll try to add more items to the book.

Maybe we will ask Don Maus for permission for the work he's done and add a sub-chapter, with a bit of Dwightism thrown in


Ed

[Don M]

Ron,

I used to write a book but am finished with that now. I can't afford to increase my gun collection in this economy. I guess I'll go fishing!

[Ron Wood]

I think what throws many folks off and myself included is that the receiver cut and imperial markings / date is not a guarantee that it was an artillery.

It is a DWM receiver...how could it have been anything other than an artillery?