Ku BYF 41 Dated Luger

Vlim · 03-17-2004, 07:52 AM

Hi,

The problem with Ku marked lugers is that there is still no verified explanation for their existance. Although many theories have been discussed and some of them are plausible there is still no written evidence on them, other than Krieghoff denying involvement in them.

If Mauser had assembled them according to their own specifications, they would not have added an extra 'Ku' mark, since it doesn't serve any real purpose (and Mauser had other 'rework' marks in use).

Most likely is that a (small) subcontractor reworked production or army rejects and added it's own Ku mark so that problems with the gun during use would point to them, rather than to the original manufacturer. A bit along the same lines as the 'Kl' reworks that show up once and again.

Who or what Ku was, is still a mystery.

03-17-2004, 07:52 AM	#18
Vlim Moderator Lifetime LugerForum Patron Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: Europe Posts: 5,053 Thanks: 1,036 Thanked 3,991 Times in 1,205 Posts	Hi, The problem with Ku marked lugers is that there is still no verified explanation for their existance. Although many theories have been discussed and some of them are plausible there is still no written evidence on them, other than Krieghoff denying involvement in them. If Mauser had assembled them according to their own specifications, they would not have added an extra 'Ku' mark, since it doesn't serve any real purpose (and Mauser had other 'rework' marks in use). Most likely is that a (small) subcontractor reworked production or army rejects and added it's own Ku mark so that problems with the gun during use would point to them, rather than to the original manufacturer. A bit along the same lines as the 'Kl' reworks that show up once and again. Who or what Ku was, is still a mystery.