1914 dwm

[DonVoigt]

It would be helpful to know the particulars of the "fakes", just serial number and any egregious errors apparent, but pictures together with the above would be best.

[Dick Herman]

Don,
A counterpoint to your suggestion would be to make a file of all of the salient features of a legitimate 1914 DWM Artillery. There is only a small pool of known 1914 DWM Artillerys that should all have the same features. Granted that there are many creative mechanics, but a bogus Artillery might not fit the same feature listing.

[DonVoigt]

Originally Posted by Dick Herman

Don,
A counterpoint to your suggestion would be to make a file of all of the salient features of a legitimate 1914 DWM Artillery. There is only a small pool of known 1914 DWM Artillerys that should all have the same features. Granted that there are many creative mechanics, but a bogus Artillery might not fit the same feature listing.

Dick,
I think we know what a 1914 should look like.
1914 receiver date with cut
Triple crown S right chamber proofing
serial numbers in the low 1000, or less.

Otherwise they look like the 1915 and early 1916.

If I left out something, George will add it.

To call out a fake, there must have been some "glaring" error, easily visible, like the serial number or proofing.

This is what I was asking, just knowing the serial number of the fakes would help, similar to Norm's navy list where spurious Navy lugers are noted.

[Dick Herman]

Don,
You are correct, the early year DWM artillery Lugers has many common features. Some of the early 1915 artillery even have three crown/S proof marks could these be altered?
With the small number of known 1914 DWM artillery Lugers perhaps there is a commonality of inspector and assembly marks unique to this variation.