![]() |
my profile |
register |
faq |
search upload photo | donate | calendar |
|
|
#7 |
|
User
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Portland, Oregon
Posts: 3,908
Thanks: 0
Thanked 1,330 Times in 435 Posts
|
Hermann,
Your barrel proof may ultimately go unidentified. The closest mark to it in Costanzo is #59, p.88. It is described as a Simson proof from 1921, found on reworks. Costanzo in unreliable when it comes to detailed identification of marks like this, I think it is fair to say that it is a military or police style test proof (depending on who was actually proofing reworks for Police acceptance, maybe a WaffenAmt?) from fairly early in the Weimar era. The frame has puzzled me since I first saw your post, as has the receiver. I have been wondering if this is an altered safety; the lack of a grip safety would tend to discount this. The frame is a short frame, but the front of the left-receiver power proof is missing, and I can't imagine that a proof inspector would stamp the receiver in this fashion. I am wondering, is this a 1906-style frame, altered, which has had the grip safety removed and the frame and receiver front ground so a standard 4" barrel would fit? It would be usefule to see a picture of the left grip frame, without the grip, to see if there is evidence of grip safety fittings and filling-in of the rear grip strap. It would also be useful to see a couple other angles of the frame front, including a reasonably close side view, to see it it can be determined if the front has been shortened. A picture of the bottom of the receiver including the witness mark and the bottom of the recoil lug might be diagnostic as well. A question for the gunsmiths in the audience, are the receiver threads on a Luger cut such that, if a mm was shaved from the front of a long receiver, would a short-frame barrrel's feed ramp, front sight, and extractor notch line up properly if it was screwed into place? --Dwight |
|
|
|
|
|