Recent purchase of complete Rig: Questions

RockinWR · 01-13-2004, 09:09 PM

Sherlock,
* "bml" was the Maker's code assigned to Hans Romer Company of Neu Ulm. Romer is a well recognized leather firm of the WW2 era.
* WaA788 was a correct Army Waffenamt Inspector's number for Hans Romer's product in 1941.
* The sE/655 tool acceptance was contemporary to Mauser Lugers accepted in (essentially) 1940-1941.
* Hence, the holster and tool would be considered most correct with a 42 code-1940 dated P.08 or a byf coded-41 dated Army Luger.
* That being said, please re-read George's response as his counsel embodies a sound measure of the pramatism & unlikely combinations experienced from a war time supply chain and combat environment.
* If the holster's closure strap is attached to the top flap and loops thru a buckle sewn to the left front seam of the holster, it is a standard Army configuration. If the closure strap is attached to the middle of the front body of the holster and holes up over a stud attached to the top flap, it is a classic Police configuration. The P.08 mark on the holster's rear suggests this example started as an Army holster.
* I may have missed you mentioning the extra mag; but, a WW2 "rig" is expected to have the second mag.
* Component value & any synergistic "rig" value is dependent on so many factors, I feel it would be misleading to fire numbers off without a much better dialog and personal evaluation. Of course pictures are a start.
* Trust this helps somewhat.
Respectfully,
Bob

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

01-13-2004, 09:09 PM	#1
RockinWR User Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: D/FW, Tx Posts: 279 Thanks: 109 Thanked 31 Times in 16 Posts	Sherlock, * "bml" was the Maker's code assigned to Hans Romer Company of Neu Ulm. Romer is a well recognized leather firm of the WW2 era. * WaA788 was a correct Army Waffenamt Inspector's number for Hans Romer's product in 1941. * The sE/655 tool acceptance was contemporary to Mauser Lugers accepted in (essentially) 1940-1941. * Hence, the holster and tool would be considered most correct with a 42 code-1940 dated P.08 or a byf coded-41 dated Army Luger. * That being said, please re-read George's response as his counsel embodies a sound measure of the pramatism & unlikely combinations experienced from a war time supply chain and combat environment. * If the holster's closure strap is attached to the top flap and loops thru a buckle sewn to the left front seam of the holster, it is a standard Army configuration. If the closure strap is attached to the middle of the front body of the holster and holes up over a stud attached to the top flap, it is a classic Police configuration. The P.08 mark on the holster's rear suggests this example started as an Army holster. * I may have missed you mentioning the extra mag; but, a WW2 "rig" is expected to have the second mag. * Component value & any synergistic "rig" value is dependent on so many factors, I feel it would be misleading to fire numbers off without a much better dialog and personal evaluation. Of course pictures are a start. * Trust this helps somewhat. Respectfully, Bob