Dovetail Machining...

Pete Ebbink · 12-01-2002, 02:01 PM

Let me state this up front : My intent here is not to stir up the controversy surrounding the .45 luger carbine and its debatable authenticity.

However, I have heard from several folks that DWM could not have possibly made intricate, detailed "dove-tailed" joints in the Early luger period.

Specifically related to the .45 luger carbine; that the stock lug attachment detail to the frame of the .45 carbine was not "possible" in the early 1900's...

Just wanted to post this photo that appears in The Dutch Luger book by Martens & De Vris on page 121; showing a modification of an old model luger into one of the ten Dutch test pistols...

I am only a beginner here, but this sure does seem to me that DWM had some complex machining capabilities in the 1904 time frame...

Would appreciate others' opinions...that is, could DWM perform such complex machining in this early time frame ?

p.s. The other criticisms of the .45 carbine luger I have heard (and have myself...) are :

1. Lack of presence of any patina and/or oxidation.

2. Lack of documentation of Ownership.

3. Lack of almost any wear.

Regards,

Pete... <img src="graemlins/yltype.gif" border="0" alt="[typing]" />

Stu · 12-01-2002, 03:41 PM

Interesting question Pete. I was just wondering this morning if anyone had written anything about the production process for Lugers.

I'm not familiar with the dovetail on the 45 you refer to, but certainly there are plenty of examples of machined dovetails even prior to that era ?

It's an interesting topic; to give 2 examples, S&W claim not to be able to reproduce the contours of the original Schofield and so had to modify it's shape for modern production. I've also seen reference to an examination of a WWII Daimler aero crankshaft by Rolls Royce who also stated they couldn't reproduce it with modern techniques. Some engineering skills and practices do seem to become outdated and eventually abandoned. Certainly the craftsmanship I've seen on some 19th century British doubles is really wonderful and would be cost prohibitive to produce today.

I'll be very interested to see if anyone can make a definitive statement about the dovetail you refer to.

Ron Wood · 12-01-2002, 05:16 PM

[quote]However, I have heard from several folks that DWM could not have possibly made intricate, detailed "dove-tailed" joints in the Early luger period.

Specifically related to the .45 luger carbine; that the stock lug attachment detail to the frame of the .45 carbine was not "possible" in the early 1900's...
<hr></blockquote>

That is probably one of the best examples of hogwash I have heard in a while. Who in the world would say such a thing with a straight face? Have any of them looked at the front sight on a Luger? Also, as can be seen in your photo, the "T" slot for the toggle latch on a 1900 model is every bit as intricate as a simple dovetail.

Heinz · 12-01-2002, 05:24 PM

Pete, Ron hit the nail on the head. Machining a dovetail is an "ancient" technique. The standard for attaching sights on firearm is the dovetail. I have an 18 century German Jaeger that is loaded with dovetails. You can do them with a hack saw and a three corner file.

drbuster · 12-01-2002, 05:52 PM

Which is all consistent with the .45 carbine being original. I have yet heard or seen anything that proves the carbine to be a fake. It is supposed not to have oxidation but a semi-chrome test was not publically done. I have held it in my gloved hands and it sure looked good to me. We have not yet heard from Charles Kenyon. It's all emotion one way or the other. Will we ever know??

Imperial Arms · 12-01-2002, 07:28 PM

With reference to Pete's list, if a firearm does not have any patina to prove age, it is very likely not genuine! Any firearm which is around 95 years old MUST have patina no matter how well somebody cares for it - that is a fact, Sir!

After a firearm has been examined for patina, then other factors such as special machining can be taken into considertation.

Albert

ViggoG · 12-02-2002, 04:05 AM

Pete, <img src="graemlins/nono.gif" border="0" alt="[nono]" />
I do not wish to be a bearer of bad news but i see nothing in the picture that COULD NOT have been done in the early 1900 time period on a production basis. [img]rolleyes.gif[/img] One only has to examine the intricate watches made by the Swiss to recognise the fact that, as fine as it was and still is, the Luger Pistol was a very crude peice of equipment "Comparatively Speaking". <img src="graemlins/icon501.gif" border="0" alt="[icon501]" />
In the early days of the Unites States entry into the WW-II conflict, Machine tools were in very short supply and many discarded machines were rebuilt and reentered into Emergency production.
I personally have been called upon to operate machinery from the late 18 th century.
Some of these machines had the latest date of design in the 1880's. <img src="graemlins/r.gif" border="0" alt="[king]" />
I have had to do much more delicate work than I see on the above photo using those same machines.
In fact the hand fitted bronze bearings gave the ability to cut and grind smoother finishes than the ball bearing machines of the early war era.
ViggoG <img src="graemlins/bigok.gif" border="0" alt="[thumbsup]" /> <img src="graemlins/icon107.gif" border="0" alt="[icon107]" />

Pete Ebbink · 12-02-2002, 05:18 PM

Guys,

As a relatively newcomer to lugers, when I heard this from two different folks (who seemed to be advanced collectors...), I certainly was not brave enough to say they were wrong.

In the back of my mind, I "saw" this photo but it took me awhile to find it in my luger books again.

Thanks for your replies...

Regards,

Pete... <img src="graemlins/yltype.gif" border="0" alt="[typing]" />

ViggoG · 12-02-2002, 10:42 PM

Quote:

As a relatively newcomer to lugers, when I heard this from two different folks (who seemed to be advanced collectors...), I certainly was not brave enough to say they were wrong. <hr></blockquote>
>
posted 12-01-2002 14:01
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Let me state this up front : My intent here is not to stir up the controversy surrounding the .45 luger carbine and its debatable authenticity.
However, I have heard from several folks that DWM could not have possibly made intricate, detailed "dove-tailed" joints in the Early luger period.
[/QUOTE]
Specifically related to the .45 luger carbine; that the stock lug attachment detail to the frame of the .45 carbine was not "possible" in the early 1900's...

Where in my statement did I say that any one was wrong?----No where,
My statement was simply to the effect that the lack of ability in this case was not a source of evidence to prove that the weapon in question could not have been machined at that time.
That not only was the ability present at that time it was also easily demonstrated many years later on the same vintage machinery, and was, and still is, easily demonstrated by the state of the art as practiced by other artisans of the period working in parallel fields.
No accusations made and no accusations intended to any party concerned, I was merely makeing a statement of the facts as I know them to be, Let the chips fall where they may.
ViggoG

Edward Tinker · 12-02-2002, 10:54 PM

ViggoG, I think Pete was talking about some guys off line he had talked to.

I agree, that hand machining is far better than some give them credit for. My dad used to work on old linotype machines, all from before 1915, I went with him to a small newspaper printer in Benton, WA, and they were works of art as they made the linotype, pouring hot lead into the holder, making the words, then printing the paper. Very cool and the point is that old machines and tolerances were tight, so it is hard to believe that those old craftsman couln't make a 45 carbine if they wanted to.

Pete Ebbink · 12-03-2002, 11:17 AM

Yes Ed and Viggo,

I was not implying that anything Viggo posted was wrong.

I was going back to the two conversations I had with two long time collectors (both 20+ years); one is person at a gun show and one via e-mails.

Regards,

Pete... <img src="graemlins/yltype.gif" border="0" alt="[typing]" />

John Sabato · 12-03-2002, 01:42 PM

Keep cool heads everyone... I think you are all in violent agreement!

The controversy over the history of the .45 carbine will continue until all the facts can be substantiated...

...and if you think about it... we don't even know all the facts about the OTHER .45 caliber Lugers... we only know bits and pieces...

If you WANT to believe that the carbine is a fraud,

OR,

If you WANT to believe that the carbine is genuine,

Then DO so... we really won't know unless all the facts are revealed about it's history... until that time, all we have is speculation, and some very intriguing forensic information...

Time MAY tell us eventually... but I submit that we will never know everything that will convince us all to the same conclusion... There is simply too much information missing...

Regards to all...

John S

ViggoG · 12-03-2002, 03:23 PM

Pete,
I'm sorry if I may have taken some statement out of context and took exception to it.
I have not formed an opinion and I will form no opinion, about these weapons, until I personally examine the those in question.
And then my opinion will be based "only" on that in which I personally have extensive experience.
(Fat Chance That I'll Ever Get To Examine Any,Much Less All)
My only "dog in this fight" is to see that the truth is served.
My apologies to "All", if anything I said seemed intended to be personal or offensive.
Sincerely,
ViggoG

Pete Ebbink · 12-03-2002, 06:09 PM

Viggo,

No offense taken... <img src="graemlins/beerchug.gif" border="0" alt="[cheers]" />

Regards,

Pete... <img src="graemlins/yltype.gif" border="0" alt="[typing]" />

12-01-2002, 02:01 PM	#1
Pete Ebbink User Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: The USA Posts: 5,919 Thanks: 0 Thanked 6 Times in 4 Posts	Dovetail Machining... Let me state this up front : My intent here is not to stir up the controversy surrounding the .45 luger carbine and its debatable authenticity. However, I have heard from several folks that DWM could not have possibly made intricate, detailed "dove-tailed" joints in the Early luger period. Specifically related to the .45 luger carbine; that the stock lug attachment detail to the frame of the .45 carbine was not "possible" in the early 1900's... Just wanted to post this photo that appears in The Dutch Luger book by Martens & De Vris on page 121; showing a modification of an old model luger into one of the ten Dutch test pistols... I am only a beginner here, but this sure does seem to me that DWM had some complex machining capabilities in the 1904 time frame... Would appreciate others' opinions...that is, could DWM perform such complex machining in this early time frame ? p.s. The other criticisms of the .45 carbine luger I have heard (and have myself...) are : 1. Lack of presence of any patina and/or oxidation. 2. Lack of documentation of Ownership. 3. Lack of almost any wear. Regards, Pete... <img src="graemlins/yltype.gif" border="0" alt="[typing]" />

12-01-2002, 05:16 PM	#3
Ron Wood Moderator 2010 LugerForum Patron Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Santa Teresa New Mexico just outside of the West Texas town of El Paso Posts: 7,040 Thanks: 1,106 Thanked 5,257 Times in 1,724 Posts	[quote]However, I have heard from several folks that DWM could not have possibly made intricate, detailed "dove-tailed" joints in the Early luger period. Specifically related to the .45 luger carbine; that the stock lug attachment detail to the frame of the .45 carbine was not "possible" in the early 1900's... <hr></blockquote> That is probably one of the best examples of hogwash I have heard in a while. Who in the world would say such a thing with a straight face? Have any of them looked at the front sight on a Luger? Also, as can be seen in your photo, the "T" slot for the toggle latch on a 1900 model is every bit as intricate as a simple dovetail. __________________ If it's made after 1918...it's a reproduction

12-02-2002, 10:54 PM	#10
Edward Tinker Super Moderator Eternal Lifer LugerForum Patron Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: North of Spokane, WA Posts: 15,966 Thanks: 2,066 Thanked 4,595 Times in 2,116 Posts	ViggoG, I think Pete was talking about some guys off line he had talked to. I agree, that hand machining is far better than some give them credit for. My dad used to work on old linotype machines, all from before 1915, I went with him to a small newspaper printer in Benton, WA, and they were works of art as they made the linotype, pouring hot lead into the holder, making the words, then printing the paper. Very cool and the point is that old machines and tolerances were tight, so it is hard to believe that those old craftsman couln't make a 45 carbine if they wanted to. __________________ Edward Tinker ************ Co-Author of Police Lugers - Co-Author of Simson Lugers Author of Veteran Bring Backs Vol I, Vol II, Vol III and Vol IV

12-03-2002, 01:42 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 2,308 Times in 1,098 Posts	Keep cool heads everyone... I think you are all in violent agreement! The controversy over the history of the .45 carbine will continue until all the facts can be substantiated... ...and if you think about it... we don't even know all the facts about the OTHER .45 caliber Lugers... we only know bits and pieces... If you WANT to believe that the carbine is a fraud, OR, If you WANT to believe that the carbine is genuine, Then DO so... we really won't know unless all the facts are revealed about it's history... until that time, all we have is speculation, and some very intriguing forensic information... Time MAY tell us eventually... but I submit that we will never know everything that will convince us all to the same conclusion... There is simply too much information missing... Regards to all... John S __________________ regards, -John S "...We hold these truths to be self-evident that ALL men are created EQUAL *and are endowed by their Creator* with certain UNALIENABLE* rights, and among these are life, LIBERTY, and the pursuit of happiness..."*

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

12-01-2002, 03:41 PM	#2
Stu User Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Atlanta GA Posts: 452 Thanks: 4 Thanked 25 Times in 16 Posts	Interesting question Pete. I was just wondering this morning if anyone had written anything about the production process for Lugers. I'm not familiar with the dovetail on the 45 you refer to, but certainly there are plenty of examples of machined dovetails even prior to that era ? It's an interesting topic; to give 2 examples, S&W claim not to be able to reproduce the contours of the original Schofield and so had to modify it's shape for modern production. I've also seen reference to an examination of a WWII Daimler aero crankshaft by Rolls Royce who also stated they couldn't reproduce it with modern techniques. Some engineering skills and practices do seem to become outdated and eventually abandoned. Certainly the craftsmanship I've seen on some 19th century British doubles is really wonderful and would be cost prohibitive to produce today. I'll be very interested to see if anyone can make a definitive statement about the dovetail you refer to.

12-01-2002, 05:24 PM	#4
Heinz User Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Greenville SC Posts: 1,004 Thanks: 377 Thanked 411 Times in 180 Posts	Pete, Ron hit the nail on the head. Machining a dovetail is an "ancient" technique. The standard for attaching sights on firearm is the dovetail. I have an 18 century German Jaeger that is loaded with dovetails. You can do them with a hack saw and a three corner file.

12-01-2002, 05:52 PM	#5
drbuster User Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: San Mateo, California Posts: 1,432 Thanks: 2 Thanked 71 Times in 56 Posts	Which is all consistent with the .45 carbine being original. I have yet heard or seen anything that proves the carbine to be a fake. It is supposed not to have oxidation but a semi-chrome test was not publically done. I have held it in my gloved hands and it sure looked good to me. We have not yet heard from Charles Kenyon. It's all emotion one way or the other. Will we ever know??

12-01-2002, 07:28 PM	#6
Imperial Arms Banned Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Malta, EU Posts: 579 Thanks: 0 Thanked 7 Times in 7 Posts	With reference to Pete's list, if a firearm does not have any patina to prove age, it is very likely not genuine! Any firearm which is around 95 years old MUST have patina no matter how well somebody cares for it - that is a fact, Sir! After a firearm has been examined for patina, then other factors such as special machining can be taken into considertation. Albert

12-02-2002, 04:05 AM	#7
ViggoG RIP Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: South Side Virginia Posts: 534 Thanks: 0 Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post	Pete, <img src="graemlins/nono.gif" border="0" alt="[nono]" /> I do not wish to be a bearer of bad news but i see nothing in the picture that COULD NOT have been done in the early 1900 time period on a production basis. [img]rolleyes.gif[/img] One only has to examine the intricate watches made by the Swiss to recognise the fact that, as fine as it was and still is, the Luger Pistol was a very crude peice of equipment "Comparatively Speaking". <img src="graemlins/icon501.gif" border="0" alt="[icon501]" /> In the early days of the Unites States entry into the WW-II conflict, Machine tools were in very short supply and many discarded machines were rebuilt and reentered into Emergency production. I personally have been called upon to operate machinery from the late 18 th century. Some of these machines had the latest date of design in the 1880's. <img src="graemlins/r.gif" border="0" alt="[king]" /> I have had to do much more delicate work than I see on the above photo using those same machines. In fact the hand fitted bronze bearings gave the ability to cut and grind smoother finishes than the ball bearing machines of the early war era. ViggoG <img src="graemlins/bigok.gif" border="0" alt="[thumbsup]" /> <img src="graemlins/icon107.gif" border="0" alt="[icon107]" />

12-02-2002, 05:18 PM	#8
Pete Ebbink User Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: The USA Posts: 5,919 Thanks: 0 Thanked 6 Times in 4 Posts	Guys, As a relatively newcomer to lugers, when I heard this from two different folks (who seemed to be advanced collectors...), I certainly was not brave enough to say they were wrong. In the back of my mind, I "saw" this photo but it took me awhile to find it in my luger books again. Thanks for your replies... Regards, Pete... <img src="graemlins/yltype.gif" border="0" alt="[typing]" />

12-03-2002, 11:17 AM	#11
Pete Ebbink User Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: The USA Posts: 5,919 Thanks: 0 Thanked 6 Times in 4 Posts	Yes Ed and Viggo, I was not implying that anything Viggo posted was wrong. I was going back to the two conversations I had with two long time collectors (both 20+ years); one is person at a gun show and one via e-mails. Regards, Pete... <img src="graemlins/yltype.gif" border="0" alt="[typing]" />

12-03-2002, 03:23 PM	#13
ViggoG RIP Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: South Side Virginia Posts: 534 Thanks: 0 Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post	Pete, I'm sorry if I may have taken some statement out of context and took exception to it. I have not formed an opinion and I will form no opinion, about these weapons, until I personally examine the those in question. And then my opinion will be based "only" on that in which I personally have extensive experience. (Fat Chance That I'll Ever Get To Examine Any,Much Less All) My only "dog in this fight" is to see that the truth is served. My apologies to "All", if anything I said seemed intended to be personal or offensive. Sincerely, ViggoG

12-03-2002, 06:09 PM	#14
Pete Ebbink User Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: The USA Posts: 5,919 Thanks: 0 Thanked 6 Times in 4 Posts	Viggo, No offense taken... <img src="graemlins/beerchug.gif" border="0" alt="[cheers]" /> Regards, Pete... <img src="graemlins/yltype.gif" border="0" alt="[typing]" />